> On July 17, 2013, 9:01 p.m., Jarek Cecho wrote:
> > core/src/test/java/org/apache/sqoop/repository/TestJdbcRepository.java, 
> > lines 99-101
> > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/12370/diff/1/?file=319347#file319347line99>
> >
> >     If the purpose is to validate if the method is being called, wouldn't i 
> > be simpler to mock it with "noop" and use verify() to ensure that it was 
> > called?
> 
> Mengwei Ding wrote:
>     Well, the upgradeConnector() and upgradeFramework() methods are final, 
> which cannot be mocked. So to verify they are being called, I make the first 
> function call inside them throw an exception.

I see that make sense, thank you for the explanation Mengwei!


- Jarek


-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/12370/#review23316
-----------------------------------------------------------


On July 18, 2013, 6:44 p.m., Mengwei Ding wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/12370/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated July 18, 2013, 6:44 p.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for Sqoop and Jarek Cecho.
> 
> 
> Bugs: SQOOP-996
>     https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SQOOP-996
> 
> 
> Repository: sqoop-sqoop2
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> commit cef19e8b3f6755f0c25e5b6cb2051a05aba6eef3
> Author: Mengwei Ding <[email protected]>
> Date:   Wed Jul 3 15:56:49 2013 -0700
> 
>     SQOOP-996: Sqoop2: create upgrade tests
> 
> :100644 100644 0732b2c... 2b6e436... M        core/pom.xml
> :000000 100644 0000000... 247e165... A        
> core/src/test/java/org/apache/sqoop/repository/TestJdbcRepository.java
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   core/pom.xml 0732b2c 
>   core/src/test/java/org/apache/sqoop/repository/TestJdbcRepository.java 
> PRE-CREATION 
> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/12370/diff/
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Mengwei Ding
> 
>

Reply via email to