On Thu, Jun 5, 2008 at 1:45 AM, Lars Heinemann
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thursday 05 June 2008 09:39:58 Bruce Snyder wrote:
>> On Thu, Jun 5, 2008 at 1:35 AM, Lars Heinemann
>>
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > Bruce,
>> >
>> > there is one big backdraw on your suggestion.
>> > The quality of the testing is very dependent to the quality of the mock
>> > classes used. After running such tests you can never say that a component
>> > works with either smx3 or smx4 as they were never really tested with the
>> > containers itself.
>>
>> Yes, I do admit that true integration testing is not achieved. But
>> honestly, the lack of testing and lack of consistency in the testing
>> of components today needs to be rectified.
>
> --> I agree. But then it would be faster and imho more effective to spend
> additional time in test improvements instead of dropping our current testing
> and do complete new mockup tests.
I'm not saying that we should drop the current testing. I guess we can
address this via Maven profiles. We could split out the tests into
separate directories based on their type, e.g., smx3 integration
level, smx4 integration level and unit level.
Bruce
--
perl -e 'print unpack("u30","D0G)[EMAIL
PROTECTED]&5R\"F)R=6-E+G-N>61E<D\!G;6%I;\"YC;VT*"
);'
Apache ActiveMQ - http://activemq.org/
Apache Camel - http://activemq.org/camel/
Apache ServiceMix - http://servicemix.org/
Apache Geronimo - http://geronimo.apache.org/
Blog: http://bruceblog.org/
