Sorry I disappeared there . . . had a little run in with some bad fish ;-(
I uploaded our test case scenarios as attachments. I would not recomend doing anything with these for a week or so as I am going to take a look at them myself and rework them a bit. However, I uploaded them so that people can look at the tests being performed if desired. As mentioned we had our test cases seperated from our junit wrappers so that we could easily execute them from from within application servers without using junit framework. TestCases then wrap scenario calls and handle exceptions as failures. I took a look at Junit 4.1 today and converted a scneario to a 4.1 test case. I prototyped the ability to run within a custom harness which handles failures for a particular environment ( just used System.out but will work nicely within AppServer using webpage report ). Attempted to use a paramatized test runner so that DataObjects created in a variety of ways could be passed into the same test method but this did not work due to some TypeHelper scoping, for now I will just have a configuration which indicates what type of DataObject creation should be used and execute the test case within new JVM for each creation method. So Junit 4.1 should work well for me and I will do some work to convert the rest of the test cases if that seems like the right direction to others. Source for test cases : http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12347228/oldTestCases.zip Conversion of a single scneario to junit 4.1: http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12347229/convertedJunit41.zip Robbie. On 12/12/06, kelvin goodson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Dan, I have opened TUSCANY-987 to cover the creation of the project structure. Would you be able to work on this and submit a patch? I'd be happy to commit it. Cheers, Kelvin. On 11/12/06, Dan Murphy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hi Kelvin, > Thanks for creating the component for Jiras... I agree we need to amend > the > names to cope with different spec / implementation versions > > We need to agree on: > > - SVN module - propose java/cts/sdo2.1 > - allow for java/cts/sdo30 & java/cts/sca (if needed) in the > future > - Java package - propose test.sdo21 > - allows for test.sdo30 / test.sca.096 (if needed) in the future > - How to easily link between test cases (or suite) and sections in the > spec - propose package conversion of test.sdo21.section.subsection > - eg. package test.sdo21.api.datagraph for tests relating to the > Java API (main section) DataGraph (minor section) of the spec > (section > 3.2) > - another eg. test.sdo21.typeconv for the DataTypes Conversion > section (section 16) > - Using test.sdo21.section.subsection makes it easy to link > cases to spec, but might be a little overkill - any thoughts ? > - Where to locate SDO 2.1.0 Java Classes - propose linking to tuscany > sdo spec project > - Link to existing ones in Tuscany (in java/spec/sdo-api), or > - package own copy > - Framework to use - JUnit or the approach Robbie has, or some other ? > - need to ensure sdo implementation is pluggable > > Now that we have a Jira component (SDO Community Tests) I guess we can > start > opening up new features against it and identifying what we have - if there > is an existing large suit / contribution then we could always just adopt > its > approach (to start with). > > Cheers, > Dan > >
-- * * * Charlie * * * Check out some pics of little Charlie at http://www.flickr.com/photos/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/sets/ Check out Charlie's al crapo blog at http://robbieminshall.blogspot.com * * * Addresss * * * 1914 Overland Drive Chapel Hill NC 27517 * * * Number * * * 919-225-1553
