Re: POP3 and IMAP support
Bruce, I agree that my excuse for not writing unit tests is lame :) With mock objects we should be able to cover a reasonable amount of code for atleast the trivial test cases. Ex. A MockPOP3Connection that returnsa predetermined response that we can compare in an assert statement. But as u said nothing can be substituted for integration testing. What I suggest is that maybe we should write a sample application that connects to a mail server and sends and reads emails . Intersted parties will run that to test with there own environment. Weshould allow all values to be configured ( preferably via a GUI interface) so that they can customize it for their own environment. The advantage of this approach (if we have under examples)is that the end users will also have a go. And obviously report on the user list if something is wrong. Having said that I know we still cover onlythe basics with authentication (Rick has made some progress on this end). so once we cover a reasonable subset of auth mechanisms then we can publish this sample application. Till then lets use it among us. Regards, Rajith. On 1/27/06, Bruce Snyder [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 1/27/06, Davanum Srinivas [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: http://james.apache.org/?James can certainly be used for testing POP3 and SMTP, but it does notyet offer full IMAP support. One of the problems with POP3 (or SMTP) tests is the dependency on a mail server for running the tests.I've not figured out how to set things up to allow for that.Authentication tests are particularly difficult, since each type of authentication may require changing the target server configuration.Please bear with me for a moment while I rant about my take on testingin order to address the statements above.soapboxTesting comes in many forms, two of which often get lumped together: unit testing and integration testing. IMO, these two types of testingare distinct and serve two very different purposes.Unit testing deals with the concept of tests that are completelyself-contained, do not require external systems and services ( e.g.,databases, mail servers, etc.) and can be executed extremely fast(i.e., seconds). Unit tests are often run during the build processbecause of these characteristics which allows a large amount of these tests to be run in a very short amount of time.Integration testing is the exact opposite of unit testing. Integrationtesting deals specifically with the concept of integrating with otherexternal systems and services. Because of this, integration tests often take a much longer time to run (i.e., minutes) and should *not*be run during the build process. These tests require a separateprocess for running and should not be run for the standard buildprocess. /soapboxThanks for reading this far! I applaud you sticking with me through mysoapbox moment ;-).One of the most difficult situations with unit testing is usuallyencountered when writing test cases for code that requires an external system or service. To address this need, I usually turn to EasyMock(http://easymock.org/). EasyMock is a mocking framework that createsmock objects for classes and interfaces on-the-fly through the use of Java proxies. Because we're still using Java 1.4x with Geronimo,EasyMock 1.2 will need to be used. When I first began using EasyMock,without any knowledge of it, I was able to mock a persistence layer ina sizeable application that required Oracle in a single afternoon. Unit tests should be able to cover everthing in the JavaMail APIs thatwe're creating from end-to-end. But unit tests are no substitution forintegration tests. It's extremely important to also write integration tests that can be run against all of the most popular mail servers.Without these, there's no way to guarantee that we're playing nicewith those mail servers.I first thought about setting up a separate mail server on one of the gbuild.org machines that can be used solely for testing the JavaMailimpl. One big issue with this strategy is that with multiple peopleusing the same mail server, we're bound to clobber one another's work. Because of this, I abandoned the idea of setting up a mail server ongbuild.org in favor of each of us setting up our own mail servers inour own environment. In my situation, I'm setting up Postfix specifically for testing on one of my machines.Becoming experts on mail servers is one of the tasks we take on inwriting the JavaMail impl. That will most certainly require specificconfigurations and customizations to situate the tests. Maybe we should loosely agree to each use a different mail server just to coverour bases. At any rate, all custom configurations will need to bedocumented for each mail server to allow others to jump in ifnecessary. If you've read this far you deserve a trophy! Thanks for listening tomy ranting. Now I expect others to shoot holes in my arguments inorder to find an ideal solution.Bruce--perl -e 'print unpack(u30,D0G)[EMAIL
Re: POP3 and IMAP support
I think an investment mock connection framework will really payoff in the long run. As we find quarks in each mail server we can easily create a new connection which captures these quarks, and everyone will be able to test without have 10 mail servers setup. -dain On Jan 29, 2006, at 8:02 AM, Rajith Attapattu wrote: Bruce, I agree that my excuse for not writing unit tests is lame :) With mock objects we should be able to cover a reasonable amount of code for atleast the trivial test cases. Ex. A MockPOP3Connection that returns a predetermined response that we can compare in an assert statement. But as u said nothing can be substituted for integration testing. What I suggest is that maybe we should write a sample application that connects to a mail server and sends and reads emails . Intersted parties will run that to test with there own environment. We should allow all values to be configured ( preferably via a GUI interface) so that they can customize it for their own environment. The advantage of this approach (if we have under examples) is that the end users will also have a go. And obviously report on the user list if something is wrong. Having said that I know we still cover only the basics with authentication (Rick has made some progress on this end). so once we cover a reasonable subset of auth mechanisms then we can publish this sample application. Till then lets use it among us. Regards, Rajith. On 1/27/06, Bruce Snyder [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 1/27/06, Davanum Srinivas [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: http://james.apache.org/? James can certainly be used for testing POP3 and SMTP, but it does not yet offer full IMAP support. One of the problems with POP3 (or SMTP) tests is the dependency on a mail server for running the tests. I've not figured out how to set things up to allow for that. Authentication tests are particularly difficult, since each type of authentication may require changing the target server configuration. Please bear with me for a moment while I rant about my take on testing in order to address the statements above. soapbox Testing comes in many forms, two of which often get lumped together: unit testing and integration testing. IMO, these two types of testing are distinct and serve two very different purposes. Unit testing deals with the concept of tests that are completely self-contained, do not require external systems and services ( e.g., databases, mail servers, etc.) and can be executed extremely fast (i.e., seconds). Unit tests are often run during the build process because of these characteristics which allows a large amount of these tests to be run in a very short amount of time. Integration testing is the exact opposite of unit testing. Integration testing deals specifically with the concept of integrating with other external systems and services. Because of this, integration tests often take a much longer time to run (i.e., minutes) and should *not* be run during the build process. These tests require a separate process for running and should not be run for the standard build process. /soapbox Thanks for reading this far! I applaud you sticking with me through my soapbox moment ;-). One of the most difficult situations with unit testing is usually encountered when writing test cases for code that requires an external system or service. To address this need, I usually turn to EasyMock (http://easymock.org/). EasyMock is a mocking framework that creates mock objects for classes and interfaces on-the-fly through the use of Java proxies. Because we're still using Java 1.4x with Geronimo, EasyMock 1.2 will need to be used. When I first began using EasyMock, without any knowledge of it, I was able to mock a persistence layer in a sizeable application that required Oracle in a single afternoon. Unit tests should be able to cover everthing in the JavaMail APIs that we're creating from end-to-end. But unit tests are no substitution for integration tests. It's extremely important to also write integration tests that can be run against all of the most popular mail servers. Without these, there's no way to guarantee that we're playing nice with those mail servers. I first thought about setting up a separate mail server on one of the gbuild.org machines that can be used solely for testing the JavaMail impl. One big issue with this strategy is that with multiple people using the same mail server, we're bound to clobber one another's work. Because of this, I abandoned the idea of setting up a mail server on gbuild.org in favor of each of us setting up our own mail servers in our own environment. In my situation, I'm setting up Postfix specifically for testing on one of my machines. Becoming experts on mail servers is one of the tasks we take on in writing the JavaMail impl. That will most certainly require specific configurations and customizations to situate the tests. Maybe we should loosely agree
Re: POP3 and IMAP support
Bruce Snyder wrote: On 1/4/06, Rajith Attapattu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-1341?page=all Thanks Bruce, Looking forward for your comments !!! My apologies for taking so long ot get this committed - I've been under water until this week. At any rate, Rajith, I didn't compare the code to the Geronimo coding standards (http://wiki.apache.org/geronimo/CodingStandards) but at a glance it looks pretty good. The one question I have is about tests - are there any? If not, please start writing some ;-). One of the problems with POP3 (or SMTP) tests is the dependency on a mail server for running the tests. I've not figured out how to set things up to allow for that. Authentication tests are particularly difficult, since each type of authentication may require changing the target server configuration. Rick Bruce -- perl -e 'print unpack(u30,D0G)[EMAIL PROTECTED]5R\F)R=6-E+G-N61ED\!G;6%I;\YC;VT* );' Apache Geronimo (http://geronimo.apache.org/) Castor (http://castor.org/)
Re: POP3 and IMAP support
Rick just summed up my problem. Also I only tested this with my mail server. Which is not enough. I am not exactly sure how to do the unit tests (as rick said it depends on each mail server), so any help with ideasare very welcome.Btw, there is a bug. The InetAddresses are not parsed properly by the java mail classes. I guess Rick you were working on this so I was wondering if I can use your impl of javax.mail.Message or MimeMessageto test this again. Besides I need to revist my desing on the POP3MessageFactory and related Message classes. I think I was over ambitous :) Regards, Rajith. On 1/27/06, Rick McGuire [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Bruce Snyder wrote: On 1/4/06, Rajith Attapattu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-1341?page=all Thanks Bruce, Looking forward for your comments !!! My apologies for taking so long ot get this committed - I've been under water until this week. At any rate, Rajith, I didn't compare the code to the Geronimo coding standards (http://wiki.apache.org/geronimo/CodingStandards) but at a glance it looks pretty good. The one question I have is about tests - are there any? If not, please start writing some ;-).One of the problems with POP3 (or SMTP) tests is the dependency on amail server for running the tests.I've not figured out how to setthings up to allow for that.Authentication tests are particularly difficult, since each type of authentication may require changing thetarget server configuration.Rick Bruce -- perl -e 'print unpack(u30,D0G)[EMAIL PROTECTED]5R\F)R=6-E+G-N61ED\!G;6%I;\YC;VT* );' Apache Geronimo (http://geronimo.apache.org/) Castor (http://castor.org/)
Re: POP3 and IMAP support
http://james.apache.org/? On 1/27/06, Rajith Attapattu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Rick just summed up my problem. Also I only tested this with my mail server. Which is not enough. I am not exactly sure how to do the unit tests (as rick said it depends on each mail server), so any help with ideas are very welcome. Btw, there is a bug. The InetAddresses are not parsed properly by the java mail classes. I guess Rick you were working on this so I was wondering if I can use your impl of javax.mail.Message or MimeMessage to test this again. Besides I need to revist my desing on the POP3MessageFactory and related Message classes. I think I was over ambitous :) Regards, Rajith. On 1/27/06, Rick McGuire [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Bruce Snyder wrote: On 1/4/06, Rajith Attapattu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-1341?page=all Thanks Bruce, Looking forward for your comments !!! My apologies for taking so long ot get this committed - I've been under water until this week. At any rate, Rajith, I didn't compare the code to the Geronimo coding standards (http://wiki.apache.org/geronimo/CodingStandards) but at a glance it looks pretty good. The one question I have is about tests - are there any? If not, please start writing some ;-). One of the problems with POP3 (or SMTP) tests is the dependency on a mail server for running the tests. I've not figured out how to set things up to allow for that. Authentication tests are particularly difficult, since each type of authentication may require changing the target server configuration. Rick Bruce -- perl -e 'print unpack(u30,D0G)[EMAIL PROTECTED]5R\F)R=6-E+G-N61ED\!G;6%I;\YC;VT* );' Apache Geronimo (http://geronimo.apache.org/) Castor (http://castor.org/) -- Davanum Srinivas : http://wso2.com/blogs/
Re: POP3 and IMAP support
On 1/27/06, Davanum Srinivas [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: http://james.apache.org/? James can certainly be used for testing POP3 and SMTP, but it does not yet offer full IMAP support. One of the problems with POP3 (or SMTP) tests is the dependency on a mail server for running the tests. I've not figured out how to set things up to allow for that. Authentication tests are particularly difficult, since each type of authentication may require changing the target server configuration. Please bear with me for a moment while I rant about my take on testing in order to address the statements above. soapbox Testing comes in many forms, two of which often get lumped together: unit testing and integration testing. IMO, these two types of testing are distinct and serve two very different purposes. Unit testing deals with the concept of tests that are completely self-contained, do not require external systems and services (e.g., databases, mail servers, etc.) and can be executed extremely fast (i.e., seconds). Unit tests are often run during the build process because of these characteristics which allows a large amount of these tests to be run in a very short amount of time. Integration testing is the exact opposite of unit testing. Integration testing deals specifically with the concept of integrating with other external systems and services. Because of this, integration tests often take a much longer time to run (i.e., minutes) and should *not* be run during the build process. These tests require a separate process for running and should not be run for the standard build process. /soapbox Thanks for reading this far! I applaud you sticking with me through my soapbox moment ;-). One of the most difficult situations with unit testing is usually encountered when writing test cases for code that requires an external system or service. To address this need, I usually turn to EasyMock (http://easymock.org/). EasyMock is a mocking framework that creates mock objects for classes and interfaces on-the-fly through the use of Java proxies. Because we're still using Java 1.4x with Geronimo, EasyMock 1.2 will need to be used. When I first began using EasyMock, without any knowledge of it, I was able to mock a persistence layer in a sizeable application that required Oracle in a single afternoon. Unit tests should be able to cover everthing in the JavaMail APIs that we're creating from end-to-end. But unit tests are no substitution for integration tests. It's extremely important to also write integration tests that can be run against all of the most popular mail servers. Without these, there's no way to guarantee that we're playing nice with those mail servers. I first thought about setting up a separate mail server on one of the gbuild.org machines that can be used solely for testing the JavaMail impl. One big issue with this strategy is that with multiple people using the same mail server, we're bound to clobber one another's work. Because of this, I abandoned the idea of setting up a mail server on gbuild.org in favor of each of us setting up our own mail servers in our own environment. In my situation, I'm setting up Postfix specifically for testing on one of my machines. Becoming experts on mail servers is one of the tasks we take on in writing the JavaMail impl. That will most certainly require specific configurations and customizations to situate the tests. Maybe we should loosely agree to each use a different mail server just to cover our bases. At any rate, all custom configurations will need to be documented for each mail server to allow others to jump in if necessary. If you've read this far you deserve a trophy! Thanks for listening to my ranting. Now I expect others to shoot holes in my arguments in order to find an ideal solution. Bruce -- perl -e 'print unpack(u30,D0G)[EMAIL PROTECTED]5R\F)R=6-E+G-N61ED\!G;6%I;\YC;VT* );' Apache Geronimo (http://geronimo.apache.org/) Castor (http://castor.org/)
Re: POP3 and IMAP support
On 1/4/06, Rajith Attapattu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-1341?page=all Thanks Bruce, Looking forward for your comments !!! My apologies for taking so long ot get this committed - I've been under water until this week. At any rate, Rajith, I didn't compare the code to the Geronimo coding standards (http://wiki.apache.org/geronimo/CodingStandards) but at a glance it looks pretty good. The one question I have is about tests - are there any? If not, please start writing some ;-). Bruce -- perl -e 'print unpack(u30,D0G)[EMAIL PROTECTED]5R\F)R=6-E+G-N61ED\!G;6%I;\YC;VT* );' Apache Geronimo (http://geronimo.apache.org/) Castor (http://castor.org/)
Re: POP3 and IMAP support
http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-1341?page=all Thanks Bruce, Looking forward for your comments !!!Regards, Rajith Attapattu. On 1/3/06, Bruce Snyder [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 1/3/06, Dain Sundstrom [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Jan 3, 2006, at 1:07 PM, Rajith Attapattu wrote: Dain when are u going to apply the patch (with the POP3impl) ?? I assume it's after 1.0 release. I actually forgot about it.I'm kind of in the middle of something, so I won't be able to get to it this week. Bruce, can you apply the patch?Yes, what's the number for the JIRA issue?Bruce--perl -e 'print unpack(u30,D0G)[EMAIL PROTECTED]5R\F)R=6-E+G-N61ED\!G;6%I;\YC;VT* );'Apache Geronimo (http://geronimo.apache.org/)
Re: POP3 and IMAP support
On 1/3/06, Rajith Attapattu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I was wondering what the current status is for IMAP?? I have begun working on the IMAP transport, but there's still much work to be done. I will work on the remaining issues of the POP3 implementation. Dain when are u going to apply the patch (with the POP3 impl) ?? I assume it's after 1.0 release. Bruce -- perl -e 'print unpack(u30,D0G)[EMAIL PROTECTED]5R\F)R=6-E+G-N61ED\!G;6%I;\YC;VT* );' Apache Geronimo (http://geronimo.apache.org/)
Re: POP3 and IMAP support
I have implemented most of store, folder and message. Currently working on the multipart messages. Didn't get much done during the holidays but hopefully I'll get a chance to work on it this week. bilal I was wondering what the current status is for IMAP?? I will work on the remaining issues of the POP3 implementation. Dain when are u going to apply the patch (with the POP3 impl) ?? I assume it's after 1.0 release. Regards, Rajith Attapattu. -- bilal - We act as though comfort and luxury were the chief requirements of life, when all that we need to make us happy is something to be enthusiastic about. - Einstein
Re: POP3 and IMAP support
On Jan 3, 2006, at 1:07 PM, Rajith Attapattu wrote: Dain when are u going to apply the patch (with the POP3 impl) ?? I assume it's after 1.0 release. I actually forgot about it. I'm kind of in the middle of something, so I won't be able to get to it this week. Bruce, can you apply the patch? -dain
Re: POP3 and IMAP support
On 1/3/06, Dain Sundstrom [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Jan 3, 2006, at 1:07 PM, Rajith Attapattu wrote: Dain when are u going to apply the patch (with the POP3 impl) ?? I assume it's after 1.0 release. I actually forgot about it. I'm kind of in the middle of something, so I won't be able to get to it this week. Bruce, can you apply the patch? Yes, what's the number for the JIRA issue? Bruce -- perl -e 'print unpack(u30,D0G)[EMAIL PROTECTED]5R\F)R=6-E+G-N61ED\!G;6%I;\YC;VT* );' Apache Geronimo (http://geronimo.apache.org/)
