>OK, but different Eclipse versions should have different versions of >JUnit ... is this ok ?
Ideally, they should be the same. >For tests, should we use the old 3.8.x, or (much) better one of the >latest 4.x (using annotations, etc) ? The only JUnit tests we currently have (written by Chris) use JUnit 4. I can't see why we would use anything earlier than this in the future. >All contents under test directories would be stripped out from base >binary jars, and if needed put in dedicated jars, right ? I imagine the resulting JARs would be the same as we have now. >In my environments I prefer to point to standard dependency jars >externally (for example C:\java_lib), and when required set jars in >the classpath from there, from IDE and from build tools. That would be option 2 or 3: http://ant.apache.org/manual/OptionalTasks/junit.html So, we have votes for 1, 2, 3, and 4. :-) Anyone else want to chime in? >For Ant builds the path for JUnit jar could be a key in the >build.properties file, so anyone could modify it as required by its >environment. Not a bad idea (though I might put it in user.properties, whose contents would be expected to vary from user to user). >And last, some tests are more visual than logic, and i don't think in >this case JUnit help too much ... some time ago I've seen other >Testing framework more UI centric, like FEST for Swing but not only ( >http://code.google.com/p/fest/ , and >http://docs.codehaus.org/display/FEST/Home ). Yeah, JUnit won't help there. But it is certainly applicable in other cases.
