You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@beehive.apache.org by Eddie O'Neil <ek...@gmail.com> on 2005/10/31 04:26:10 UTC
beehive test webapp project models
All--
I'm planning on starting to re-organize the test webapps in Beehive
to match the project model that we ship in the Beehive distribution.
The resulting webapps should look like:
<project-root>/
src/
web/
build.xml
where all build to a :
build/
directory.
Should make it much easier to use / clean / import into an IDE / etc.
Thoughts welcome. Any dissenting opinions?
Eddie
Re: [big changes coming] Re: beehive test webapp project models
Posted by Eddie O'Neil <ek...@gmail.com>.
This change is now in the tree -- Struts 1.1 tests are currently disabled.
Please be careful not to break them. :)
Should have them back online in the next few days.
Eddie
On 10/31/05, Eddie O'Neil <ek...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Two other test recorder related changes I forgot about:
>
> 1) added a <testrecorder-deploy> Ant macro that can be used to deploy
> the test recorder into a web application
> 2) added a <testrecorder-config> Ant macro that removes the need for a
> test recorder config JAR file. The TR config files are now filtered
> for replaceable tokens and placed directly into WEB-INF/classes.
>
> The change will also remove:
>
> trunk/netui/test/ant/buildWebapp.xml
> trunk/netui/test/ant/webapp-imports.xml
> trunk/netui/test/dist-test/files/ant/testWebBuild.xml
>
> in a continued effort to simplify all of this stuff as they're no longer needed.
>
> :)
>
> Eddie
>
>
>
>
> On 10/31/05, Eddie O'Neil <ek...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > All--
> >
> > Given the size of this change, just an update here...
> >
> > I'm working to more loosely couple the test infrastructure and the
> > NetUI test web applications; this has gone pretty well, though it's
> > not a small change. Basically, I've reworked the NetUI distribution
> > test infrastructure to:
> >
> > - copy each web application in full from its location in SVN into the
> > test distribution
> > - build and run each web application using its own Ant build file
> > - run each web application "in place"
> >
> > The result is a significantly simpler infrastructure. This is all en
> > route to reorganizing the test webapps into the new web/ + src/
> > project model. Since we're in a little bit of a lull between
> > releases, now seems like a good time to do this.
> >
> > This also necessitated the change to the test recorder described
> > before; specifically, the testRecorderCore.xml file's "server.test"
> > target now takes a "app.build.dir" that is the parent directory of a
> > web application build.xml file.
> >
> > The change (coming tomorrow) will also reorganize the urlTemplates
> > application into the new project structure. jsfWeb and coreWeb will
> > follow in the coming days.
> >
> > In order to get this working in a manageable set of changes, I've
> > temporarily disabled two features of the distribution test:
> >
> > - the test recorder XML files generated during a test run don't all
> > end up in uniquely named directories. This will be fixed by passing a
> > unique directory name into the TR in a subsequent change
> >
> > - Struts 1.1 testing has been disabled and will be re-enabled once all
> > of the web applications have a consistent build model again
> >
> > If you've got concerns, let me know. Otherwise, I'm going to plow
> > ahead with this reorganization.
> >
> > The fun continues...
> >
> > :)
> >
> > Eddie
> >
> >
> >
> > On 10/31/05, Eddie O'Neil <ek...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > I'll backpedal on this...due to the way that the <build-pageflows>
> > > Ant macro works, I'll need to move the .jpf files to .java in order to
> > > rework the web application project models. Will attempt to do this
> > > incrementally.
> > >
> > > In addition, I'm going to need to alter a small part of the test
> > > recorder Ant API to change the "app.build.file" attribute for the
> > > testRecorder.xml's server.test target from a fully qualified path to
> > > the Ant build file to a fully qualified path to the *directory* that
> > > contains the Ant build file. This is because of the need to switch
> > > the <ant> calls from something like this:
> > >
> > > <ant antfile="${app.build.file}" ...>
> > >
> > > to:
> > >
> > > <ant dir="${app.build.dir}" antfile="build.xml" ... >
> > >
> > > in order to set the "basedir" of the called Ant file correctly.
> > >
> > > All test recorder applications will need to change as a result of this.
> > >
> > > Let me know if anyone has questions; I should have the jsf and
> > > urlTemplate tests done in the next day or so.
> > >
> > > Eddie
> > >
> > > On 10/30/05, Eddie O'Neil <ek...@bea.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > It's definitely something that should be done (IMHO), but I wasn't going to tackle it with the
> > > > initial reorg of the directory structures and builds.
> > > >
> > > > Maybe someone can come along and do that next. ;)
> > > >
> > > > Eddie
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Daryl Olander wrote:
> > > > > Are you going to move the .jpf files into source and rename them .java?
> > > > >
> > > > > On 10/30/05, Eddie O'Neil <ek...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > >> All--
> > > > >>
> > > > >> I'm planning on starting to re-organize the test webapps in Beehive
> > > > >> to match the project model that we ship in the Beehive distribution.
> > > > >> The resulting webapps should look like:
> > > > >>
> > > > >> <project-root>/
> > > > >> src/
> > > > >> web/
> > > > >> build.xml
> > > > >>
> > > > >> where all build to a :
> > > > >>
> > > > >> build/
> > > > >>
> > > > >> directory.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Should make it much easier to use / clean / import into an IDE / etc.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Thoughts welcome. Any dissenting opinions?
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Eddie
> > > > >>
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
Re: [big changes coming] Re: beehive test webapp project models
Posted by Eddie O'Neil <ek...@gmail.com>.
Two other test recorder related changes I forgot about:
1) added a <testrecorder-deploy> Ant macro that can be used to deploy
the test recorder into a web application
2) added a <testrecorder-config> Ant macro that removes the need for a
test recorder config JAR file. The TR config files are now filtered
for replaceable tokens and placed directly into WEB-INF/classes.
The change will also remove:
trunk/netui/test/ant/buildWebapp.xml
trunk/netui/test/ant/webapp-imports.xml
trunk/netui/test/dist-test/files/ant/testWebBuild.xml
in a continued effort to simplify all of this stuff as they're no longer needed.
:)
Eddie
On 10/31/05, Eddie O'Neil <ek...@gmail.com> wrote:
> All--
>
> Given the size of this change, just an update here...
>
> I'm working to more loosely couple the test infrastructure and the
> NetUI test web applications; this has gone pretty well, though it's
> not a small change. Basically, I've reworked the NetUI distribution
> test infrastructure to:
>
> - copy each web application in full from its location in SVN into the
> test distribution
> - build and run each web application using its own Ant build file
> - run each web application "in place"
>
> The result is a significantly simpler infrastructure. This is all en
> route to reorganizing the test webapps into the new web/ + src/
> project model. Since we're in a little bit of a lull between
> releases, now seems like a good time to do this.
>
> This also necessitated the change to the test recorder described
> before; specifically, the testRecorderCore.xml file's "server.test"
> target now takes a "app.build.dir" that is the parent directory of a
> web application build.xml file.
>
> The change (coming tomorrow) will also reorganize the urlTemplates
> application into the new project structure. jsfWeb and coreWeb will
> follow in the coming days.
>
> In order to get this working in a manageable set of changes, I've
> temporarily disabled two features of the distribution test:
>
> - the test recorder XML files generated during a test run don't all
> end up in uniquely named directories. This will be fixed by passing a
> unique directory name into the TR in a subsequent change
>
> - Struts 1.1 testing has been disabled and will be re-enabled once all
> of the web applications have a consistent build model again
>
> If you've got concerns, let me know. Otherwise, I'm going to plow
> ahead with this reorganization.
>
> The fun continues...
>
> :)
>
> Eddie
>
>
>
> On 10/31/05, Eddie O'Neil <ek...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > I'll backpedal on this...due to the way that the <build-pageflows>
> > Ant macro works, I'll need to move the .jpf files to .java in order to
> > rework the web application project models. Will attempt to do this
> > incrementally.
> >
> > In addition, I'm going to need to alter a small part of the test
> > recorder Ant API to change the "app.build.file" attribute for the
> > testRecorder.xml's server.test target from a fully qualified path to
> > the Ant build file to a fully qualified path to the *directory* that
> > contains the Ant build file. This is because of the need to switch
> > the <ant> calls from something like this:
> >
> > <ant antfile="${app.build.file}" ...>
> >
> > to:
> >
> > <ant dir="${app.build.dir}" antfile="build.xml" ... >
> >
> > in order to set the "basedir" of the called Ant file correctly.
> >
> > All test recorder applications will need to change as a result of this.
> >
> > Let me know if anyone has questions; I should have the jsf and
> > urlTemplate tests done in the next day or so.
> >
> > Eddie
> >
> > On 10/30/05, Eddie O'Neil <ek...@bea.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > It's definitely something that should be done (IMHO), but I wasn't going to tackle it with the
> > > initial reorg of the directory structures and builds.
> > >
> > > Maybe someone can come along and do that next. ;)
> > >
> > > Eddie
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Daryl Olander wrote:
> > > > Are you going to move the .jpf files into source and rename them .java?
> > > >
> > > > On 10/30/05, Eddie O'Neil <ek...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >> All--
> > > >>
> > > >> I'm planning on starting to re-organize the test webapps in Beehive
> > > >> to match the project model that we ship in the Beehive distribution.
> > > >> The resulting webapps should look like:
> > > >>
> > > >> <project-root>/
> > > >> src/
> > > >> web/
> > > >> build.xml
> > > >>
> > > >> where all build to a :
> > > >>
> > > >> build/
> > > >>
> > > >> directory.
> > > >>
> > > >> Should make it much easier to use / clean / import into an IDE / etc.
> > > >>
> > > >> Thoughts welcome. Any dissenting opinions?
> > > >>
> > > >> Eddie
> > > >>
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
>
[big changes coming] Re: beehive test webapp project models
Posted by Eddie O'Neil <ek...@gmail.com>.
All--
Given the size of this change, just an update here...
I'm working to more loosely couple the test infrastructure and the
NetUI test web applications; this has gone pretty well, though it's
not a small change. Basically, I've reworked the NetUI distribution
test infrastructure to:
- copy each web application in full from its location in SVN into the
test distribution
- build and run each web application using its own Ant build file
- run each web application "in place"
The result is a significantly simpler infrastructure. This is all en
route to reorganizing the test webapps into the new web/ + src/
project model. Since we're in a little bit of a lull between
releases, now seems like a good time to do this.
This also necessitated the change to the test recorder described
before; specifically, the testRecorderCore.xml file's "server.test"
target now takes a "app.build.dir" that is the parent directory of a
web application build.xml file.
The change (coming tomorrow) will also reorganize the urlTemplates
application into the new project structure. jsfWeb and coreWeb will
follow in the coming days.
In order to get this working in a manageable set of changes, I've
temporarily disabled two features of the distribution test:
- the test recorder XML files generated during a test run don't all
end up in uniquely named directories. This will be fixed by passing a
unique directory name into the TR in a subsequent change
- Struts 1.1 testing has been disabled and will be re-enabled once all
of the web applications have a consistent build model again
If you've got concerns, let me know. Otherwise, I'm going to plow
ahead with this reorganization.
The fun continues...
:)
Eddie
On 10/31/05, Eddie O'Neil <ek...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I'll backpedal on this...due to the way that the <build-pageflows>
> Ant macro works, I'll need to move the .jpf files to .java in order to
> rework the web application project models. Will attempt to do this
> incrementally.
>
> In addition, I'm going to need to alter a small part of the test
> recorder Ant API to change the "app.build.file" attribute for the
> testRecorder.xml's server.test target from a fully qualified path to
> the Ant build file to a fully qualified path to the *directory* that
> contains the Ant build file. This is because of the need to switch
> the <ant> calls from something like this:
>
> <ant antfile="${app.build.file}" ...>
>
> to:
>
> <ant dir="${app.build.dir}" antfile="build.xml" ... >
>
> in order to set the "basedir" of the called Ant file correctly.
>
> All test recorder applications will need to change as a result of this.
>
> Let me know if anyone has questions; I should have the jsf and
> urlTemplate tests done in the next day or so.
>
> Eddie
>
> On 10/30/05, Eddie O'Neil <ek...@bea.com> wrote:
> >
> > It's definitely something that should be done (IMHO), but I wasn't going to tackle it with the
> > initial reorg of the directory structures and builds.
> >
> > Maybe someone can come along and do that next. ;)
> >
> > Eddie
> >
> >
> >
> > Daryl Olander wrote:
> > > Are you going to move the .jpf files into source and rename them .java?
> > >
> > > On 10/30/05, Eddie O'Neil <ek...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >> All--
> > >>
> > >> I'm planning on starting to re-organize the test webapps in Beehive
> > >> to match the project model that we ship in the Beehive distribution.
> > >> The resulting webapps should look like:
> > >>
> > >> <project-root>/
> > >> src/
> > >> web/
> > >> build.xml
> > >>
> > >> where all build to a :
> > >>
> > >> build/
> > >>
> > >> directory.
> > >>
> > >> Should make it much easier to use / clean / import into an IDE / etc.
> > >>
> > >> Thoughts welcome. Any dissenting opinions?
> > >>
> > >> Eddie
> > >>
> > >
> >
> >
>
Re: beehive test webapp project models
Posted by Eddie O'Neil <ek...@gmail.com>.
I'll backpedal on this...due to the way that the <build-pageflows>
Ant macro works, I'll need to move the .jpf files to .java in order to
rework the web application project models. Will attempt to do this
incrementally.
In addition, I'm going to need to alter a small part of the test
recorder Ant API to change the "app.build.file" attribute for the
testRecorder.xml's server.test target from a fully qualified path to
the Ant build file to a fully qualified path to the *directory* that
contains the Ant build file. This is because of the need to switch
the <ant> calls from something like this:
<ant antfile="${app.build.file}" ...>
to:
<ant dir="${app.build.dir}" antfile="build.xml" ... >
in order to set the "basedir" of the called Ant file correctly.
All test recorder applications will need to change as a result of this.
Let me know if anyone has questions; I should have the jsf and
urlTemplate tests done in the next day or so.
Eddie
On 10/30/05, Eddie O'Neil <ek...@bea.com> wrote:
>
> It's definitely something that should be done (IMHO), but I wasn't going to tackle it with the
> initial reorg of the directory structures and builds.
>
> Maybe someone can come along and do that next. ;)
>
> Eddie
>
>
>
> Daryl Olander wrote:
> > Are you going to move the .jpf files into source and rename them .java?
> >
> > On 10/30/05, Eddie O'Neil <ek...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> All--
> >>
> >> I'm planning on starting to re-organize the test webapps in Beehive
> >> to match the project model that we ship in the Beehive distribution.
> >> The resulting webapps should look like:
> >>
> >> <project-root>/
> >> src/
> >> web/
> >> build.xml
> >>
> >> where all build to a :
> >>
> >> build/
> >>
> >> directory.
> >>
> >> Should make it much easier to use / clean / import into an IDE / etc.
> >>
> >> Thoughts welcome. Any dissenting opinions?
> >>
> >> Eddie
> >>
> >
>
>
Re: beehive test webapp project models
Posted by Eddie O'Neil <ek...@bea.com>.
It's definitely something that should be done (IMHO), but I wasn't going to tackle it with the
initial reorg of the directory structures and builds.
Maybe someone can come along and do that next. ;)
Eddie
Daryl Olander wrote:
> Are you going to move the .jpf files into source and rename them .java?
>
> On 10/30/05, Eddie O'Neil <ek...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> All--
>>
>> I'm planning on starting to re-organize the test webapps in Beehive
>> to match the project model that we ship in the Beehive distribution.
>> The resulting webapps should look like:
>>
>> <project-root>/
>> src/
>> web/
>> build.xml
>>
>> where all build to a :
>>
>> build/
>>
>> directory.
>>
>> Should make it much easier to use / clean / import into an IDE / etc.
>>
>> Thoughts welcome. Any dissenting opinions?
>>
>> Eddie
>>
>
Re: beehive test webapp project models
Posted by Daryl Olander <do...@gmail.com>.
Are you going to move the .jpf files into source and rename them .java?
On 10/30/05, Eddie O'Neil <ek...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> All--
>
> I'm planning on starting to re-organize the test webapps in Beehive
> to match the project model that we ship in the Beehive distribution.
> The resulting webapps should look like:
>
> <project-root>/
> src/
> web/
> build.xml
>
> where all build to a :
>
> build/
>
> directory.
>
> Should make it much easier to use / clean / import into an IDE / etc.
>
> Thoughts welcome. Any dissenting opinions?
>
> Eddie
>