On Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 12:13 AM, Jonathan Gallimore < [email protected]> wrote:
> > > On Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 12:01 AM, David Blevins > <[email protected]>wrote: > >> >> On Sep 28, 2011, at 3:36 PM, Jonathan Gallimore wrote: >> >> > When I hacked up the Remote with zip adapter I intended to >> > merge it into the remote adapter - along the lines of: check to see if >> TomEE >> > is running on the port specified in arquillian.xml. If it is, just >> deploy >> > straight to it. If not, go grab the zip and use that. Does that sound >> like a >> > reasonable idea? >> >> Very reasonable. That's what the itests have done for years, the CDI TCK >> does and the Java EE TCK setup does. >> >> It's pretty easy to have the rule of "if you don't want us to start a >> server, make sure a server is started" >> > > Cool, I'll get that done. > I've extended the remote adapter to allow this. If you specify something like (note the 1.0.0-beta-1 OpenEJB version and no Tomcat version): <arquillian xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance"; xsi:schemaLocation="http://jboss.org/schema/arquillian http://jboss.org/schema/arquillian/arquillian_1_0.xsd";> <container qualifier="tomee" default="true"> <configuration> <property name="dir">/tmp/arquillian-apache-tomee</property> <property name="httpPort">9080</property> <property name="stopPort">9005</property> <property name="tomcatVersion"></property> <property name="openejbVersion">1.0.0-beta-1</property> </configuration> </container> </arquillian> if nothing is running on port 9080 we'll download TomEE, unzip it, start it and use that for the test. If you changed the OpenEJB and Tomcat versions to, say: <property name="tomcatVersion">7.0.21</property> <property name="openejbVersion">4.0.0-beta-1</property> We'd download Tomcat and the OpenEJB.war, set that up, and use that instead. So we should be able to use this to test against Tomcat 5.5/6 with OpenEJB. I quite like this, but it would be great to get any feedback. > > >> >> > That leaves the embedded-with-war adapter as something that might seem a >> bit >> > odd. Currently I can't get it to run correctly, but that might be >> something >> > wrong with my machine. What's people's opinion of this method? Should we >> > drop this, or is it a useful adapter to hang on to? >> >> My impression is I would never ever advise a user to use it. That said, >> it's an absolutely fabulous way for us to test the drop-in-war >> functionality. Well, almost fabulous... the real world scenario is an >> existing Tomcat install, not an embedded one. >> >> Either way, if we say to people "you can do this and it works!" having an >> adapter for it us a must. Especially if we get things to the point where we >> can easily reuse the full set of tests on each adapter. At that point we >> just need to hook up each adapter with a buildbot builder and suddenly we >> have a dreamlike level of testing for the various features we offer. >> > > We shouldn't have any issues getting the tests to run on all the adapters. > Worst case we can use Maven profiles and run the tests against the embedded > adapter by default, and you just switch profile to use the other modes. The > buildbot builders can then presumably be setup with the necessary profile > switch in their build. > > I was thinking it would be cool to try and extend either the test suite or > the Arquillian test runner somehow so the test then runs against all the > adapters in one go. > > I was going to do the Maven profile bit first, as that should be reasonably > straightforward, and then take it from there. > > I've done some refactoring around the Arquillian test suite, so the tests now run against both adapters. Currently we have ~6 failures and 2 errors for both adapters, and it should be the same tests in both cases. We currently run 82 tests. This was a pretty bug refactor - it seemed like things worked well in the embedded case, because everything is right there on the classpath. Running remotely a lot of tests failed as they relied on the test or junit being available from the app being tested. I've separated the inner classes out, divided things up into packages and tried to move a couple of methods to trim what would need to be added to the Shrinkwrap archives. We still need junit in a couple of cases, so in a couple of places we add that in as a lib. Hope that's all ok. There's probably some duplicate classes we could chop out. Running the tests can be done by running the test Maven goal in the arquillian-tomee-tests module. Choosing which adapter to use is done by enabling a Maven profile. By default we run against the embedded adapter (arquillian-tomee-embedded). Doing a 'mvn -Parquillian-tomee-remote clean install' will build and test against the remote adapter. If you're using an IDE plugin such as m2e, you should be able to specify the desired Maven profile in your IDE settings and the tests should run straight from the IDE (works for me in Eclipse) - please shout if you have trouble, I'll be more than happy to help! Jon
