Like I said in my earlier email, new unit tests only prevent future regression they don't serve as an indicator to the quality of the contribution they're submitted with. If I were to provide unit tests for the EntityQuery class it would tell you exactly zero about whether or not upgrading existing code to the new API will have any problems. Only pre-existing unit tests can give an indication of regression for new code changes.
We already have unit tests for lots of the code that will be upgraded to the new API and I'm fairly confident those tests will catch any issues with the EntityQuery class (because it would be a regression to existing code). But to allay your fears about the lack of unit tests, I believe an HWM developer is planning to contribute some tests for the EntityQuery class. Please also keep in mind that the new API actually uses the existing Delegator API so there is not really much new logic or functionality here, just an enhanced way to access the same old thing. Regards Scott On 6/10/2014, at 7:14 pm, Hans Bakker <[email protected]> wrote: > So Scott, > > you introduce a new API named EntityQuery without a unit test, then you are > going to replace the existing well working API with something which is not > tested continuously.... > > i love the idea :-( > > and then everybody asking for reliability and quality..... > > Regards, > Hans > > On 06/10/14 09:43, Scott Gray wrote: >> On 6/10/2014, at 3:24 pm, Hans Bakker <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> On 06/10/14 09:15, Scott Gray wrote: >>>> Hi Hans, >>>> .......... >>>> Lastly, the majority of our tests are implemented in mini-lang and I'm >>>> really not a fan of it at all. If there were support for converting them >>>> to groovy (do we even support groovy tests?), I'd be glad to help lead >>>> that change. >>>> >>>> and then, start with OFBIZ-5699? >>>> >>>> Regards,'Hans >> That won't happen any time soon, I'll be dealing with the conversion to >> EntityQuery for the foreseeable future. >> >> Regards >> Scott >
