Hi Martin, although I find TestNG to be a better tool I don't think that switching makes sense (now). I would go making the Geo* integration, adding tests (! which is more important then everything else IMO :)), making a first release and then probably switch if it is really worth the effort (e.g. junit is still more wide spread yet and has better tool support yet. Probably in some months this gets better for TestNG **).
BTW: Switching can be done nearly automatically via an eclipse plugin: http://testng.org/doc/migrating.html > The capability to specify tests dependencies seems attractive you can do so for junit too or what do you mean here? > , and the fact that TestNG doesn't recreate new "FooTest" instance for every tests may speed-up when the constructor performs heavy initialization. Constructors shouldn't do that ;) Regards, Peter. ** e.g. there was no TestNG integration in Netbeans which is now there, but still misses some important features http://wiki.netbeans.org/TestNG > Hello all > > SIS currently uses JUnit for testing. Myself I have always used JUnit > too for all my projects. However during the last OGC meeting, I had a > talk with some peoples involved in the OGC CITE tests and we > considered the possibility to share some effort between CITE tests and > GeoAPI conformance module. However the CITE team has chosen TestNG, > and they suggested me to switch to TestNG too for easier integration. > > Switching to TestNG may be a significant effort since we would need to > port not only the existing SIS tests, but also the GeoAPI conformance > module and the Geotk tests ported to SIS. As far as GeoAPI-conformance > is concerned, we may also lost some potential users since TestNG can > run JUnit tests through an adapter, but I have not hear about the > converse. > > However the advantage would be potentially easier cooperation with > CITE tests, and TestNG is said to be a more powerful framework (I > didn't evaluated myself). The capability to specify tests dependencies > seems attractive, and the fact that TestNG doesn't recreate new > "FooTest" instance for every tests may speed-up when the constructor > performs heavy initialization. > > What do peoples think? > > Martin
