I would not go that route ... IMHO, JUnit should be our default choice for newly written tests.
Best Jonathan 2009/4/24 Peter Firmstone <[email protected]> > It appears to me that I should perhaps be writing jtreg style unit tests > for ClassDep rather than JUnit? > > 3 different test toolkits might be going overboard, especially since there > appears to be a good deal of overlap between jtreg and junit. I don't want > to get into a philosophical idealistic comparison between the two tools as I > personally prefer junit; only because I'm familiar with it, it just seems > like the most commonsense approach. > > Cheers, > > Peter Firmstone. > > > Peter Jones wrote: > >> On Wed, Apr 22, 2009 at 08:37:58PM +0200, Jonathan Costers wrote: >> >> >>> Waw, thanks a lot for your explanation, Peter. It clears up a lot of >>> things for me :-) >>> >>> >> >> You're welcome. >> >> >> >>> So, do you think it would be useful to enable these tests in River? >>> >>> >> >> I think that they provide valuable coverage. >> >> >> >>> Are they overlapping with the QA suite? >>> >>> >> >> I don't think that there's much overlap. >> >> >> >>> Should we choose one or the other framework? Or should we keep both? >>> >>> >> >> Well, jtreg is in no position to handle the main Jini QA suite, so it >> wouldn't be the one chosen. As mentioned, the jtreg model is simple >> enough that it's conceivable that support for it could be added to >> another harness, like the Jini QA harness. But if the OpenJDK's jtreg >> implementation can be used where necessary, doing that might not seem >> worth the effort. >> >> Another option of course would be to port these jtreg-style tests to >> some other test framework, but that might require a good deal of >> effort (and for regression tests, some risk whether the regression >> condition is still being effectively tested). I should disclose some >> bias: as a JDK old-timer, I am fond of jtreg, for what it's good at. >> >> -- Peter >> >> >> > >
