ZopeTestCase (CMFTestCase, PloneTestCase) was designed for testing *applications*. As you say, when I write a CMF application I should be able to assume the CMF below works. In this case a "fat fixture" makes perfect sense (to me). Also, I firmly believe application developers should not need to dig deep into the framework just to be able to write some tests; this was my motivation for starting ZTC in the first place.

I am not in the business of shoving CMFTestCase down anybody's throat. CMFCore.tests.base has everything CMF-the-framework needs, and SecurityRequestTest provides basically the same fixture you would get from using ZTC (app object, transaction, request, and security context).

Whether tests you write turn out to be unit or integration tests does not depend on the test framework, IMO. It depends on where you draw the line in the stack.


On 6. Okt 2005, at 17:47, Tres Seaver wrote:

I do not believe that "trusting the stack" makes senses when trying to
test a component of the stack.  If you are writing tests for an
application (or higher layer) which *uses* the stack, then you can
safely trust it.  For instance, I'm willing to use OFS.SimpleItem and
OFS.Folder when building out a test jig, because they belong to a lower
layer of the stack, and have their own tests.

Anything that happens, happens.  --Douglas Adams

Zope-CMF maillist  -  Zope-CMF@lists.zope.org

See http://collector.zope.org/CMF for bug reports and feature requests

Reply via email to