While I agree that it is easy to copy-n-paste, I do believe it is easier and more convenient to just depend on a test jar, subclass the test class and be on your way writing tests.
Given the two options, my vote is to create a separate 'test' module that people can depend on if they want. People can depend on it if they like, but they can just ignore it if they'd rather copy-n-paste. My .02, Les On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 11:45 PM, Allan Ditzel <[email protected]> wrote: > The main value would be in not having to worry about the clean up > binding/unbinding the subject and doing so in an exception safe manner. > > To put it differently, it makes it easy for someone to do unit testing in > their app without really having to add much thought to the internals of > Shiro. I thought one of the goals of the project was low barrier to entry? > > On Nov 22, 2011, at 3:36 PM, Kalle Korhonen wrote: > >> On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 3:18 PM, Allan Ditzel <[email protected]> wrote: >>> This class would be useful for end users in writing their own unit tests, >>> instead of having to copy-paste the example for the docs. However, where >>> should this class reside? Do we want a separate test module that users >>> include for their tests or should it be a part of the core module in its >>> own testing package? >> >> Absolutely not in the same core package. There's no special reason to >> avoid creating new modules since it's inexpensive, however I really >> doubt it's usefulness considering there's only 70 or so lines of code, >> most of it pass-through methods (i.e. where's the actual value in >> setSecurityManager(SecurityManager securityManager) >> {SecurityUtils.setSecurityManager(securityManager);}). Copy-paste >> would allow evolving it to a different direction in client projects. >> >> Kalle
