Following the brief discussion we began having on irc, this is what I believe you mean and are proposing -
that itests should be run (on modules), during the time of an assembly creation. The key word here is "during". This is also why itests should use the same version of maven that assembly plugin also uses. I imagined this quite differently. I thought and still think we should run the itests "on" the assemblies, outside the assembly process. Here are a few reasons - 1. Build and Test will be kept separate functionally. 2. The itests 'subproject' can scale better. The testbucket could become potentially large as more modules start adding their own itests or increasing the number of test scenarios. 3. The throughput of the itests will not determine the throughput of the G build. Even if we do fix the openejb itests in G now to make it very fast, when we have a potentially large number of itests contributed by different folks for different modules, they tend to add up. 4. It will be difficult to selectively include/exclude a few tests. This is how I'd imagined it, at a very high level. - The itests subproject will have it's own set of modules. These are the modules in G that have dropped their itests into this subproject. - The tests will be grouped logically into suites or categories. Each individual test will fall in one of these suites. - The tests can all be run or only a subset of suites can be run quite easily. - Continuum will continue to build G first and then run itests on the assemblies. - If the assembly passes a certain set of tests, then it can be certified good and then be uploaded to the repository. - a download page will be available to download assemblies and binaries from every single build. The builds that passed itests will be clearly marked so. What do you think ? Cheers Prasad On 1/30/06, Prasad Kashyap <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > David, > > Can you please help clarify the following points > > You wrote, "...but in each assemblies module after an assembly is > built is where they need to execute..". I'm sorry, I quite didn't > catch what that meant. > > Next, if the assemblies are assembled using maven 1.. do they then > have to deployed using maven 1 only ? Can't they be deployed using m2 > ? > > Cheers > Prasad > > On 1/29/06, David Blevins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Jan 29, 2006, at 6:12 AM, Prasad Kashyap wrote: > > > > > On the list of Dain's "Roamap, tasks and things to do" list, > > > integration tests that cover servlets, webservices and jms was quite > > > at the top. > > > http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg16593.html > > > > > > I would like to propose the following test strategy. > > > > > > 1. Fix existing openejb itests such that they can be reintegrated back > > > into the builds. > > > > > > 2. Create a testing subproject first in the sandbox that can be used > > > to test other services and components. This subproject will use maven > > > 2. Integration test is already a phase in the Maven2 lifecycle. > > > > > > 3. Create a new deployment plugin for maven 2 for use by the testing > > > subproject. A new one is needed because the openejb itests still use > > > maven 1. > > > > > > 4. As the test suite grows, we can move the subproject from sandbox to > > > the main branch/trunk. Hopefully by then, openejb will have come out > > > of it's incubator status for it's itests to join the rest. > > > > > > What say you all ? Comments, advice, suggestions more than welcome. > > > > > > > This is a good initative. Couple notes off the top of my head. > > > > A clarification on step 1 would be that we need to run the itest on > > each assembly we create. Don't mind if they are off by default and > > run only when we build in continuum, but in each assemblies module > > after an assembly is built is where they need to execute. > > > > If we wanted to build the new itests in maven 2, that'd be ok. We > > just need to make sure they run on our assemblies, which use maven > > 1. We wouldn't need a maven 2 version of our deployment plugin > > unless we started building the assemblies with maven 2. > > > > If more working itests start showing up, i'd be fine with an itests > > module next to applications, assemblies, configs, etc.. We'd just > > want to make sure that the test we add are actually running with the > > main build and not just a bunch of test-to-get-working-someday like > > David J. and I did when we tried to create itests about this time in > > '04. > > > > Thoughts? > > > > -David > > > > >
