Log of failures. First cut will have console & GUI, I'll look into generating web pages when we start to do automated builds.
On Wed, 2006-08-30 at 14:55 -0400, Carl Trieloff wrote: > Will the test set fail on first failure or create a log of failures? > > > Alan Conway wrote: > > I'm going to start building a "broker compliance" python test suite > > (unless Steve gives me ruby bindings :) > > > > I've put a simple unittest framework in place and converted the 3 > > existing python tests. I've also added some cleanup functionality so > > queues and exchanges created during a test get deleted at the end. It'll > > all probably need some tuning going forward but it's a start. > > > > My next step is to build tests covering the functionality I want to > > build in C++ which is the exchange types. The <rule> elements in > > amqp.xml seem like a good source of initial tests, and I expect I'll > > need to augment with tests for stuff not covered by a <rule> > > > > So I propose this structure: > > > > 1) for each spec class (e.g. exchange) we create module > > python/tests/exchange.py containing test class TestExchangeRules. That > > class contains test methods for each rule. I'd rather use the rule name > > attributes from the latest spec trunk than the previous test names, > > e.g. queue.QueueRuleTests.test_minimum_queues > > not queue.QueueRuleTests.test_amq_queue_35. > > > > 2) where we need additional tests we add further ad-hoc test classes , > > e.g. for topic exchange tests, we might add exchange.TestTopicExchange > > etc. > > > > I've some vague ideas about automating checks for correspondence between > > amqp.xml and the python test classes but we'll see how ambitious I get. > > > > Any suggestions for improvements most appreciated. > > > > Cheers, > > Alan. > > > > >
