Alex Karasulu a écrit :
Right now the organization is setup to have two kinds of integration
tests
in two separate modules:
core-unit => which IMO should be called core-integration :)
server-unit => which IMO should be called server-integration :)
Well, there is a little difference between those names. I think that
core-unit and server-unit are good names, because they tell exactly what
they are good for : unit-testing the core and the server (MINA
included). IMHO, the proposed name (ie xxx-integration) is not good
because it suggest that it contains only integration tests, which is not
the case. Remember that to run in-test, you have to set -Dintegration
when running mvn.
That's another pb we have : integration tests are somhow mixed with unit
tests... Anyway, not a big deal.
<SNIP>
However we
can add
any kind of network protocol test to these tests.
Yes, we can, but I don't really think this would be a good idea. Ok, let
me explain what I have in mind : the base of all protocol is LDAP. Those
tests have been written to validate the core server (LDAP). Any other
protocols will use LDAP, so if we include other protocols tests into
server-unit, it will become a big mess. Suppose someone want to fix
something in protocol-NTP, he will have to change the server-unit to add
its new integration tests, and if the fix is not ok, then all the build
will be broken. With a clear separation, it will be possible to remove
the procotol-NTP-unit from the main pom.xml in order to build the server.
Two more points :
- I know that we are not supposed to commit a broken piece of code, but,
face the facts, it happens
- if someone is just trying to work on a specific protocol, I'm not sure
he has to run all the 15 minutes unit tests just to be sure his fix is ok.
If we add a kerberos-unit then to follow the same scheme we would have to
rename
server-unit to ldap-unit.
Well, may be. At least, it makes sense.
Then we would create a changepw-unit and so on.
I don't know
how many tests we're adding but if not that many keeping them in the same
project
may be less overhead both in terms of maven build time and in terms of
managing the
project.
I'm not sure that having 5 more sub-projects will cost a lot compared to
the time spent in each server-unit and core-unit tests (around half a
second per test). When you run eclipse:eclipse, the full build is very
fast (less than 30seconds), compared to running mvn -Dintegration test
(15 minutes on my laptop).
Clarity should be favored, IMHO. Maybe we should add a subdivision
called protocol, and have sub-sub-projects in it :
apacheds
|
+--> core
+--> ...
+--> protocols
|
+--> LDAP
+--> Kerberos
+--> ...
I'd recommend (for now) just putting the kerberos tests and other
protocol
tests into a
special package to differentiate them from the LDAP integration tests in
server-unit. We
eventually need to better organize them but a package level separation
should give
new comers enough of a cue as to the nature of the test.
Really, I don't think so. We have hundred of unit tests in server-unit,
and the package separation does not give an immediat clue about them. If
we have to rename server-unit to ldap-unit, then it won't be good. I
don't really like the idea of having all the protocol tests into
server-unit... But may be it's just me ;)
For now I say because I'd like to keep the tests together as much as
possible since we
may soon need to refactor these integration tests to use one or more test
suites that starts
a single server which is cleaned out rather than deleted and restarted
for
each test method
or test class. Clumping the integration tests into packages may make
this
job easier down
the road for us.
We definitively need to find a better way to organize tests. Starting
and shutting down the sevrer for each tests is just killing us. Now, as
I said, I would prefer to have a separate sub-project for kerberos tests
for the reasons I mentionned before. Of course, this is just my opinion,
and I won't roll down the floor crying and yelling if you think it's
better to gather all of them with a package separation.
I will be off for 2 weeks, so it's up to you, guys !
Emmanuel
