On 7/04/2010, at 7:59 PM, Bob Morley wrote: > Scott Gray-2 wrote: >> >> OFBiz follows the textXXX method names because it has to for JUnit to work >> (at least for the version we have). Renaming the Class just seems like a >> pain especially when a plural makes more sense. Are you sure Clover isn't >> configurable in this regard? >> > > There is "Advanced Test Case Detection" that is typically used if you are > using a framework other than JUnit 3.x, 4.x, or TestNG. I could certain use > that in my development environment and avoid the renames. My line of > thinking goes something like ... if there is a broadly accepted standard we > should probably just adhere to it unless there is significant reason not to. > > PROS: Adheres to broadly accepted naming convention, allows IDE tooling to > pickup without additional configuration.
Well if it's a broadly accepted standard then I guess we should follow it. > CONS: I suspect we lose SVN history, involves some work, if we upgrade to > JUnit 4.x and use annotations there is less of a need (but I still think the > naming conventions are a good thing). You don't lose svn history when a file is renamed (so long as it is done properly but isn't difficult) So yeah sure, I don't have a problem with making the change. Anything that improves the tests is good with me. Regards Scott
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
