@christian: +1 (@as7: sounds like a missing cleanup, like it's done for tomee)
regards, gerhard 2014/1/3 Christian Kaltepoth <[email protected]> > Hey Ron, > > yeah, there are differences between arquillian.xml files. But why? I don't > see any reason for having different arquillian.xml files between modules. > Actually the integration test Maven profiles are also located in a single > parent pom and not in each individual module pom. IMHO we should treat > arquillian.xml the same way. Unless there is a good reason for having > multiple ones. > > I agree that we should unpack the container only once. I'm not sure I like > to use java.io.tmpdir though. It would be nice to have it in the top-level > "target" directory or something like that. That would ensure that running > "mvn clean" would also remove the unpacked container. > > Christian > > > 2014/1/2 Ron Smeral <[email protected]> > > > > > On 2.1.2014 17:55, Christian Kaltepoth wrote: > > > >> Hey all, > >> > >> there are two things I would like to address regarding our integration > >> test > >> suite. > >> > >> 1. Currently each module has its own arquillian.xml file. IMHO this > >> doesn't > >> make sense. What about using a single arquillian.xml and placing it in > the > >> test-utils module? > >> > > +0, there are minor differences among them currently (though not sure if > > necessary), and it would make it more difficult to make an individual > > modification if there was single arquillian.xml. > > > > > >> 2. We have both "managed" and "remote" profiles for some containers. But > >> the "managed" profiles (especially Wildfly + Glassfish) require you to > >> manually download and setup the corresponding container which I would > like > >> to avoid. I think it would be nicer if the "managed" profiles could do > >> this > >> automatically. This would simplify the process of running the tests > >> locally > >> before committing and it would also be easier to create CI jobs for > them. > >> See [1] for an example of a profile which sets up the container > >> automatically and therefore runs out of the box even in transient CI > >> environments like Travis [2]. > >> > > There already is such profile at least for JBoss AS7 > > (jbossas-build-managed-7) and at this very moment I'm adding such profile > > for WildFly. However, currently there is a minor drawback to the current > > approach -- the container is unpacked for every module and so almost 5 GB > > of diskspace is required to run the whole testsuite, which is quite > > impractical. It would be nice to have the container unpacked to a shared > > location, e.g. ${java.io.tmpdir}, just as in the ocpsoft rewrite pom you > > linked. I'll try that in the AS7 and WF8 profiles. > > > > > > > >> Thoughts? > >> > >> [1] https://github.com/ocpsoft/rewrite/blob/master/pom.xml#L706 > >> [2] https://travis-ci.org/ocpsoft/rewrite/builds/16192940 > >> > >> Christian > >> > >> > >> -- > > Ron Smeral > > JBoss Quality Engineer > > Brno > > > > > > > -- > Christian Kaltepoth > Blog: http://blog.kaltepoth.de/ > Twitter: http://twitter.com/chkal > GitHub: https://github.com/chkal >
