Hi, given I have not gotten any answer! Do you guys want the tests within MyFaces or is Arquilian an absolute must?
Werner Am Do., 6. Okt. 2022 um 16:22 Uhr schrieb Werner Punz <werner.p...@gmail.com >: > Hi, > I just wanted to get feedback on the following: > Atm we have a barebones Ajax integration test in our integration test > system, derived from my github based integration testsuite. > Problem is > a) It is barebones, and basically just the basic tests, which is mostly > test 1 of my suite, also it needs lots of code for maintenance. > b) The current aquilian installation makes problems ( have not spent too > much time fixing this, i just filed a bugreport for now) > c) The new codebase uses already a ton of mocha based unit tests on ts > level > > I have my own set of atm 19 integration tests, which I run against my > codebase. The issue is, that this testcase uses mocha in the pages to > collect the test data and to run the tests with a well known api. > And in the backend a server is running providing beans and response. > The test results are collected client side. > > Given the troubles I had with Aquilian, I have extended my codebase on > Github so that the tests automatically run with an embedded chrome via the > maven frontend plugin > and also the frontend plugin hooks the test results into the maven build > So basically internally maven starts an embedded tomcat viay the exec > plugin and the frontend plugin pushes an embedded windowless chrome against > this code to run the tests and collect the results, and reports them back > to Maven > in the integration test phase > ... > [INFO] > http://localhost:8080/IntegrationJSTest/integrationtestsjasmine/test10-doubleeval.jsf > [INFO] Page test10-doubleeval Successes: > [INFO] => Regression test for double eval on a single script element > [INFO] => Runs the double eval test > [INFO] ✔ double evaluation of embedded scripts testcase (281ms) > [INFO] > http://localhost:8080/IntegrationJSTest/integrationtestsjasmine/test11-scriptblocks.jsf > [INFO] Page test11-scriptblocks Successes: > [INFO] => Script blocks in various formats > [INFO] => Performs a script bloc test > ... > > [INFO] => Execute none handling > [INFO] => SPEC HAS NO EXPECTATIONS runs an execute request with execute > @none > [INFO] ✔ execute parameter test (281ms) > [INFO] > [INFO] > [INFO] 19 passing (23s) > [INFO] > [INFO] > [INFO] --- maven-failsafe-plugin:2.12:verify (default) @ IntegrationJSTest > --- > > This how it looks if all tests have passed > > or in case of a failure: > [INFO] 18 passing (23s) > [INFO] 1 failing > [INFO] > [INFO] 1) Integration Testsuite MyFaces > [INFO] testing viewRoot: > [INFO] > [INFO] AssertionError: expected false to be true > [INFO] + expected - actual > [INFO] > [INFO] -false > [INFO] +true > [INFO] > [INFO] at Context.<anonymous> > (src/main/webapp/resources/myfaces.testscripts/integrationtestrunner_frontend/integrationtests.spec.js:75:28) > [INFO] at processTicksAndRejections > (node:internal/process/task_queues:96:5) > [INFO] > [INFO] > [INFO] > [INFO] > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > [INFO] BUILD FAILURE > [INFO] > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > The config is as follows: > > The advantage is that the tests are now way easier to write and hook > themselves perfectly into the client side unit test system. > > Next advantage you also can run the tests directly in your browser and you > also can show a browser instead of an headless embedded chrome. > > We also would get 17-18 additional integration tests "for free" in the > myfaces codebase, simply because I have them already written a long time > ago. > The disadvantage is (whether this really is one) we bypass Aqulian in > favor of the frontend plugin node and mocha. > > I have this system working now, but as usual would perform another round > of cleanups before merging it into myfaces, after the RC3 jsf_ts merge. > So what´s your opinion, shall we add those tests to the codebase? I do not > have any problem, to leave them where they are, they work fine for my > purposes. > > > Werner > > >
