It looks good to me for the scope of the current patch.

Regards,

__
Cedric Gatay (@Cedric_Gatay <http://twitter.com/Cedric_Gatay>)
http://code-troopers.com | http://www.bloggure.info | http://cedric.gatay.fr


On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 9:58 AM, Martin Grigorov <[email protected]>wrote:

> Hi CDI experts,
>
> I've just added the first unit test for wicket-cdi module (
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/WICKET-5226).
> It is not related to proper testing of injections.
> Please review it.
>
>
> On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 11:49 AM, Martin Grigorov <[email protected]
> >wrote:
>
> >
> > Hi Igor & Emond,
> >
> > At the moment we don't have any tests for wicket-cdi module.
> > Do you use something similar for testing your application(s) like what
> > Cedric suggested in users@ or you use something with mocks like
> > Spring's ApplicationContextMock that we have.
> > With Guice it is also very easy to use a Module with bindings needed only
> > for the particular test.
> > There is no need to emulate application container to run your
> Spring/Guice
> > tests.
> >
> > I doubt that Arquilian is the only option for testing CDI based apps. But
> > I don't have experience with CDI myself.
> > I'll be glad to add some tests for wicket-cdi(-1.1) module.
> >
> >
> > ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> > From: Cedric Gatay <[email protected]>
> > Date: Sun, Jun 2, 2013 at 8:57 PM
> > Subject: Re: WicketTester CDI and WicketApplication
> > To: [email protected]
> >
> >
> > Hi David,
> > you can have a look at the base CDI enabled test class we're using at
> > code-troopers in the following gist :
> > https://gist.github.com/CedricGatay/5694293
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > __
> > Cedric Gatay (@Cedric_Gatay <http://twitter.com/Cedric_Gatay>)
> > http://code-troopers.com | http://www.bloggure.info |
> > http://cedric.gatay.fr
> >
> >
> > On Sat, Jun 1, 2013 at 6:15 PM, David Beer <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> >
> > > Hi Cedric
> > >
> > > Thanks for the reply I will take a look at Arquillian and see how I can
> > > use it. Any guides are helpful especially when used with wicket.
> > >
> > > Thanks
> > >
> > > David
> > >
> > > On 01/06/13 16:20, Cedric Gatay wrote:
> > >
> > >> Hi,
> > >>
> > >> I usually use Arquillian to deploy a CDI context in my tests which
> > require
> > >> injection to work (often it happens for pages tests). When testing
> > >> individual components it is easy to "manually" inject references
> (either
> > >> via package visibility or via PowerMock's Whitebox for instance).
> > >>
> > >> Regards,
> > >>
> > >> __
> > >> Cedric Gatay (@Cedric_Gatay <http://twitter.com/Cedric_**Gatay<
> > http://twitter.com/Cedric_Gatay>
> > >> >)
> > >>
> > >> http://code-troopers.com | http://www.bloggure.info |
> > >> http://cedric.gatay.fr
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> On Sat, Jun 1, 2013 at 5:13 PM, David Beer <[email protected]>
> > >> wrote:
> > >>
> > >>  Hi All
> > >>>
> > >>> I am having difficulty finding information on how I can create a CDI
> > >>> context for use in my tests. Is there some kind of way of creating a
> > mock
> > >>> cdi environment for testing. Currently my tests fail trying to
> retrieve
> > >>> the
> > >>> CDI Bean Manager as this is normally controlled by the Web
> Application
> > >>> Container.
> > >>>
> > >>> Do I need to create a mock Web Application class which simulates a
> > dummy
> > >>> Bean Manager? Is there any guides specific to Wicket?
> > >>>
> > >>> Thanks
> > >>>
> > >>> David
> > >>>
> > >>> ------------------------------****----------------------------**
> > >>> --**---------
> > >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@wicket.**apa**che.org<
> > http://apache.org>
> > >>> <users-unsubscribe@**wicket.apache.org<
> > [email protected]>
> > >>> >
> > >>>
> > >>> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >
> > >
> ------------------------------**------------------------------**---------
> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@wicket.**apache.org<
> > [email protected]>
> > > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>

Reply via email to