You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@tapestry.apache.org by manuel aldana <al...@gmx.de> on 2009/02/21 02:49:43 UTC
[test-codebase] testng vs. junit
Hi,
am testing around, what I noticed is that for unit tests imports (@Test,
asserts) testng is imported instead of junit packages. Afaik testng is
about integration tests, but I guess it can be used as completely
isolated unit tests also, so it is used in testing codebase exclusively?
--
manuel aldana
aldana@gmx.de
software-engineering blog: http://www.aldana-online.de
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@tapestry.apache.org
Re: [test-codebase] testng vs. junit
Posted by manuel aldana <al...@gmx.de>.
OK, thanks.
So TestNG replaces JUnit in tapestry testing. I was a bit confused
because JUnit dependency was imported to tapestry project. But itself it
is a transitive dependency of TestNG (see maven pom.xml). Most likely it
does so for the transformation feature (JUnit->TestNG).
So far only worked with JUnit, but TestNG looks very promising.
Especially because it explicitly introduces integration test type. I
have seen JUnit often misused to test too much in one test case.
Thiago H. de Paula Figueiredo schrieb:
> On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 10:49 PM, manuel aldana <al...@gmx.de> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>
> Hi!
>
>
>> am testing around, what I noticed is that for unit tests imports (@Test,
>> asserts) testng is imported instead of junit packages. Afaik testng is about
>> integration tests,
>>
>
> Not true. From TestNG's website: "TestNG is designed to cover all
> categories of tests: unit, functional, end-to-end, integration,
> etc..."
>
>
--
manuel aldana
aldana@gmx.de
software-engineering blog: http://www.aldana-online.de
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@tapestry.apache.org
Re: [test-codebase] testng vs. junit
Posted by "Thiago H. de Paula Figueiredo" <th...@gmail.com>.
On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 10:49 PM, manuel aldana <al...@gmx.de> wrote:
> Hi,
Hi!
> am testing around, what I noticed is that for unit tests imports (@Test,
> asserts) testng is imported instead of junit packages. Afaik testng is about
> integration tests,
Not true. From TestNG's website: "TestNG is designed to cover all
categories of tests: unit, functional, end-to-end, integration,
etc..."
--
Thiago
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@tapestry.apache.org
Re: [test-codebase] testng vs. junit
Posted by Robert Zeigler <ro...@scazdl.org>.
testng was written as a replacement for junit; ie, it's original
intent was unit testing.
Robert
On Feb 20, 2009, at 2/207:49 PM , manuel aldana wrote:
> Hi,
>
> am testing around, what I noticed is that for unit tests imports
> (@Test, asserts) testng is imported instead of junit packages. Afaik
> testng is about integration tests, but I guess it can be used as
> completely isolated unit tests also, so it is used in testing
> codebase exclusively?
>
> --
> manuel aldana
> aldana@gmx.de
> software-engineering blog: http://www.aldana-online.de
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@tapestry.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@tapestry.apache.org