Hi! >> I noticed that there are only some tests for components in Tomahawk. >> Wouldn't it be great to have a test-case as a requirement for >> promoting a component ? > Sure, if we can decide what reasonable test cases are. I would like to see more test-cases too, but not by using mock tests. I think for component testing its way too much work and error prone after refactoring. I was told (thanks to matze ;-) ) that trinidad uses so called gold-files - it compares the resulting html with an "known-to-be-good" (=gold) html file, though, what I really would like to see for component testing is something like htmlunit (http://htmlunit.sourceforge.net/) which allows some basic javascript testing too.
>> And of course, Mike is right in *testing* with RI and example. > > Note that I don't think that the component necessarily has to work > with the RI to be promoted. But the documentation for the component > should state whether it's expected to work with the RI or not, which > would be determined by the testing. This is my point too, we should document if a tag breaks RI compatibility. As far as I know, only the form and command* stuff will break RI compatibility and - as long as there is no spec for this, its hard to make it "any JSF" compatible - we can act as RI and so we can be RI compatible, but as long as there is no spec for the parameter passing stuff we cant make it "any JSF" compatible. However, whats the case why we didnt change our classes to be at least RI compatible? Thomas and Martin wanted to look at it, but didnt came up with a solution - is there something fundamental which prevents it, or is it simply a matter of time? Ciao, Mario
