Hi, I have in fact already used org.apache.sling.testing.osgi-mock when testing the new feature in oak-store-composite. However, after manually validating using AEM Quickstart, I have discovered bugs which were not caught by my tests using MockOsgi, especially around binding values from configuration files to @Property or @AttributeDefinition fields. AFAIK, MockOsgi does not support reading & binding “.cfg.json” or “.config” files.
MockOsgi is great for unit or component tests, but it seems, at least to me, quite easy to make wrong assumptions about how OSGi components are activated and wired together when writing tests involving several components. I would like to have integration tests running in a real OSGi framework to feel more confident that the code will run without issues in the real thing. I have quite some experience in writing libraries for Spring Boot: I often write integration tests which start a Spring Boot container to ensure that all the Spring-enabled features of the library are correctly injected & wired together. Up until now, I have used AEM Quickstart to manually test Oak changes, but the roundtrip is very slow, cumbersome, and frustrating... That’s the reason I would like to implement these automated OSGi integration tests inside the Oak repository itself. There are other future changes in oak-segment-azure I will soon start working on, which would also benefit from this kind of integration tests. If there is a better way to achieve the same confidence using just MockOsgi (and at the same time removing the need to validate through AEM Quickstart), then I’m very interested to learn about it. Regards, Carlo From: Angela Schreiber <[email protected]> Date: Tuesday, 18 January 2022 at 16:04 To: [email protected] <[email protected]> Subject: Re: Oak-it-osgi module Hi Carlo In the various security related modules I used org.apache.sling.testing.osgi-mock to test the OSGi setup. I never used oak-it-osgi as a base for tests. Kind regards Angela ________________________________ From: Carlo Jelmini <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, January 18, 2022 3:54 PM To: [email protected] <[email protected]> Subject: Re: Oak-it-osgi module Hi Angela, I agree with the idea. However, what is then the best approach to add OSGi integration tests in other modules, without duplicating the Pax-Exam setup? Does it make sense to use oak-it-osgi as a test dependency (using the “tests” classifier)? Regards, Carlo From: Angela Schreiber <[email protected]> Date: Tuesday, 18 January 2022 at 08:43 To: [email protected] <[email protected]> Subject: Re: Oak-it-osgi module Hi Carlo The oak-it-osgi module is IMHO not particularly well maintained and I would rather add the tests to the very modules the belong to. Kind regards Angela ________________________________ From: Carlo Jelmini <[email protected]> Sent: Monday, January 17, 2022 4:15 PM To: [email protected] <[email protected]> Subject: Oak-it-osgi module Hi, I’m looking for a good place to add integration tests for the issue “Enable configuration of more than one read-only mount in the composite node store“[0] and I think the module “oak-it-osgi” is the best candidate. However, I’m surprised to see that, with the current maven-failsafe-plugin configuration, the integration tests are not executed by Maven. Moreover, when enabling execution, the tests fail to start the forked OSGi container. Lastly, most tests just print to the console, without any assertions. I have fixed all the above-mentioned issues and I could submit a PR, but now I wonder if the module is still maintained or whether I’m misunderstanding its purpose. Is it ok if the integration tests from this module are executed, with actual assertions, on each build? Should I then submit my fixes? If this module is not the right place, where should I move my integration tests which validate OSGi configurations for multiple mounts with composite node store? Thanks, Carlo [0] https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fissues.apache.org%2Fjira%2Fbrowse%2FOAK-9553&data=04%7C01%7Cjelmini%40adobe.com%7C6f6a81fbbb1f494546db08d9da93d39b%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C637781150717574598%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000&sdata=v%2BoF5scBbGDvJs73gzpJ8Q4cTNU7s8wZ%2FShYvMYVd7o%3D&reserved=0
