RE: Testing for production [was: Re: Blocking defect for JAMESv2.3]

["Noel J. Bergman" <no...@devtech.com>]

Norman Maurer wrote:

> IMHO such a "debugging" should be better done with JUNIT tests...
> Postage is great for "performance tests" etc..

JUNIT testing is not the same as an external test harness.  We should be
able to drive a test from SMTP connection through to POP3 or IMAP.  So
Postage could send a known message and test the results that it receives,
including testing for any expected changes (e.g., use of any
SetMimeHeaders).

Perhaps adding BSF (or JSR-223) support to Postage would be a good thing.
Postage providing core capabilities, and allowing scripting for tests.

	--- Noel


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: server-dev-unsubscribe@james.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: server-dev-help@james.apache.org

Re: Testing for production [was: Re: Blocking defect for JAMESv2.3]

[Bernd Fondermann <bf...@brainlounge.de>]

Noel J. Bergman wrote:
> 
> Perhaps adding BSF (or JSR-223) support to Postage would be a good thing.
> Postage providing core capabilities, and allowing scripting for tests.

OK, good idea. I'd like to have standard tests, like checking headers, 
built into Postage directly and provide scripting for more complicated 
evaluations.

   Bernd

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: server-dev-unsubscribe@james.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: server-dev-help@james.apache.org