We're not yet committed to standardizing on *any* single test
framework for Cosmo, OAF or other. In fact we'll have more than one
-- we are beginning to run Litmus (granted, not exactly a test
framework) automatedly, we have junit tests which aren't going away,
and we are considering what to focus on for automated client requests.
Have you considered the Python doctest-based client automated tests
that Heikki proposed and the Slide java/XML data-file oriented
approach that Grant posted on? Comments?
If the actual *unit* tests remain in Java, can the client automated
tests (the protocol request suites) be in Python without harm?
Lisa
On Feb 10, 2006, at 11:56 AM, Kervin L. Pierre wrote:
Hello Group,
I am going to share my initial reaction to this
proposal though I understand some may resent
someone outside the development team coming
across as critical...
Philippe Bossut wrote:
(http://wiki.osafoundation.org/bin/view/Projects/
OpenAutomationFramework) first. Keep in mind also that Mikeal is
trying to solve a problem that includes Chandler and Cosmo.
Unifying the testing procedure and tools sound like
a good idea but this will introduce Python as a
dependency for testing Cosmo.
a. Python is a large dependency simply for tests
when Java has no shortage of testing frameworks.
b. Someone working on cosmo may have no python
experience at all and we may want to encourage
developers to add their own tests as they go along.
c. Internally Cosmo and Chandler have very little
in common and so very few tests are going to
be able to be shared.
Best Regards,
Kervin
_______________________________________________
Cosmo mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.osafoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/cosmo
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Open Source Applications Foundation "Dev" mailing list
http://lists.osafoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
