Oliver Deakin wrote: > Geir Magnusson Jr wrote: >> Oliver Deakin wrote: >> >>> George Harley wrote: >>> >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> Just seen Tim's note on test support classes and it really caught my >>>> attention as I have been mulling over this issue for a little while >>>> now. I think that it is a good time for us to return to the topic of >>>> class library test layouts. >>>> >>>> The current proposal [1] sets out to segment our different types of >>>> test by placing them in different file locations. >>> ok - on closer reading of this document, I have a few gripes... >>> >>> First, what happened to the Maven layout we agreed on a while ago? >>> >> >> "Maven layout"? We were doing that layout in Jakarta projects long >> before maven.... >> > > Interesting - I hadn't realised that was the case. However, it still > doesn't explain the missing "java" directory ;)
Oh, agreed. We definitely should normalize this. > >> This is a fun thread. I plan to read it from end to end later today and >> comment. >> >> Initial thoughts are that I've been wanting to use TestNG for months >> (hence my resistance to any JUnit deps more than we needed to) and >> second, annotations won't solve our problems. More later :) >> > > No, annotations will not solve *all* our problems - but, as you probably > already know, they may solve some of those recently discussed on this > list when used in conjunction with TestNG (such as platform specific > tests, test exclusions etc.). Maybe :) geir > > Regards, > Oliver > > >> geir >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> >> >> > --------------------------------------------------------------------- Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
