Hi DBlevins...
On 11/27/06, David Blevins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi Manu,
On Nov 23, 2006, at 2:04 AM, Manu George wrote:
> Hi David/Mohammad,
>
> What I was planning was to add annotated beans for each of the
> corressponding beans deployed using the deployment descriptor. Then
> execute all the test cases existing for the dd deployed beans for the
> annotated beans as well.
Sounds great.
> In addition to this we need to create new
> test cases for checking the overrides as well as the defaults(i.e.
> beans with the very minimum annotations. The unpecified config
> attributes should be substituted by defaults).
Even with the override testing idea I posted before, we'll still want
a few beans and tests, so this is still a good idea.
> I was thinking that if we can deploy the annotated ejbs with
> the same name as the dd based ones we can execute the existing tests
> as well. We will have the beans and remote interfaces extending from
> the existing ones as well.
We don't have support for it yet, but we can use the mappedName
attribute of the @Stateful, @Stateless, or @MessageDriven annotations
to specify the OpenEJB deploymentId. We'll likely want to start
using the mappedName of some of the other annotations as well. And
we'll definitely want to document how we've allocated the
"mappedName" attributes of various annotations on the website nice
and clearly as it's vendor-specific. Maybe a table of some sort.
> I plan to implement this by creating two new TestSuites
> corressponding to iTest and RemoteiTest namely AnnotatediTest and
> AnnotatedRemoteiTest. In iTest and RemoteiTest I will add the
> following system property
> System.setProperty("openejb.deployments.classpath.exclude",
> ".*openejb-itests-annotated-beans.*");
> This will prevent openejb from loading the descriptors in that
> directory and so the annotated beans.Similarly if I set the property
> to .*openejb-itests-beans.* in AnnotatediTests suite then the dd based
> beans won't be deployed. This will minimize the tests we need to write
> for annotated beans.
Exactly what that's for! Though I'm beginning to think we should add
an "openejb.deployments.classpath.include" as well. Is this
something someone want's to add?
Me me meeeeeeeeee :), I will create a JIRA and start on but when I get home
as I am at work now.
One issue I am not sure of here is even though we
> will have annotated business interfaces in the jar deployed in server
> the existing tests will use the parent interfaces only so we may need
> to create some tests with annotated interfaces used at client side.
I'm not sure out that will play out either. We should be able to get
by, but there may be places we want tests dedicated to the annotated
beans/interfaces.
> Now I may have been missing something when i came up with
> this approach and so it may not work. So I am looking for your
> comments poiniting out the issues with this approach. Better
> ideas,improvements and comments are welcome from anyone.
You nailed it pretty well.
One thing in general is that the field injection, setter injection,
EJBContext.lookup (no JIRA for this yet), and JNDI ENC lookup tests
are all going to doing pretty much the exact same things. It'd be
best if they were all as similar as possible. We have a test for the
JNDI ENC lookups on the types available in EJB 1.1 (needs to be
updated for EJB3 also).
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/openejb/trunk/openejb3/
itests/openejb-itests-beans/src/main/java/org/apache/openejb/test/
stateless/EncStatelessBean.java
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/openejb/trunk/openejb3/
itests/openejb-itests-client/src/main/java/org/apache/openejb/test/
stateless/StatelessJndiEncTests.java
This may or may not be useful as a launching pad for the new tests.
We don't have to follow that style and we very well may want to
rewrite that test to follow the style of the new tests if it turns
out to be different.
-David
> Thanks
> Manu
>
> On 11/20/06, David Blevins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> On Nov 20, 2006, at 1:48 AM, Manu George wrote:
>>
>> > Hi David,
>> > Have you created the beans that we are going to test
>> > annotations? If not shall I go ahead and create the beans as
>> extending
>> > from the current test beans. I plan to create the session beans
>> > required for testing the annotations you have implemented.
>>
>> Go for it!
>>
>> You can throw everything into an itests/openejb-itests-annotated-
>> beans/ module.
>>
>> Note sure just yet how we'll wire it in to run with the other tests.
>> If you have any ideas, I'm all ears.
>>
>> -David
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
--
Thanks
- Mohammad Nour
