On Sat, Aug 7, 2010 at 3:35 PM, Trevor Parscal <[email protected]>wrote:
> I'm not /totally/ opposed to breaking away from the standard terminology > of unit/integration/acceptance testing... We could call it something > more descriptive than system though - perhaps "client"... Going with names like "unit" and "client" have the advantage that the names document what type of tests that they are, with the framework not really being important. However, names like "selenium" and "phpunit" have the advantage that, should we decide to start moving to a new framework (say, the fictional "foounit"), we put the new foounit tests in a foounit directory, keep the phpunit tests in the phpunit directory, and there's never a confusing mixing of tests from different frameworks in the same directory. It's not that big of a deal either way. My 2c: pick something reasonably consistent, then put a very clear README.txt file that describes what is in the tests/ directory. That way, if we decide to use the framework name, and if someone doesn't know that "selenium" is for system/client/acceptance/whateveryouwanttocallit testing, they can look at the README and figure it out. Rob _______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
