You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@harmony.apache.org by Tim Ellison <t....@gmail.com> on 2006/07/07 00:10:12 UTC
[testing] Peace (was: Re: svn commit: r419522 - in /incubator/harmony/enhanced/classlib/trunk/modules/nio:
.classpath build.xml make/hyproperties.xml src/test/java/common/ src/test/java/common/org/
src/test/java/linux/ src/test/java/org/ src/test/java/windows/)
May I tactfully suggest that we get this back to a discussion of the
pros and cons of JUnit test suites and/or TestNG metadata vs. directory
layout.
It sounds like we all want to resolve that problem asap.
Regards,
Tim
George Harley wrote:
> Mark Hindess wrote:
>> On 6 July 2006 at 18:05, George Harley
>> <ge...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Mark Hindess wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 6 July 2006 at 12:55, George Harley <ge...@googlemail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hi Mark,
>>>>>
>>>>> From what I can tell this JIRA hasn't really achieved much apart
>>>>> from pushing code around the repository and breaking at least one
>>>>> patch (HARMONY-755).
>>>>>
>>>> Well, obviously that wasn't my motivation! ;-)
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Hi Mark,
>>>
>>> No one was saying it was. BTW, good to hear you have some motivation :-)
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> >From the description, it was clear (to me anyway) that the patch
>>>> was to
>>>> enable the use of platform-specific test code. While the directories
>>>> for the platform-specific test code are currently empty, I'm certain
>>>> Paulex plans to rectify this pretty soon.
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Creating empty directories is not the issue here. The patch also
>>> entailed moving a whole bunch of other files around the source tree
>>> for reasons that are currently being discussed in the dev list.
>>>
>>>
>>>> I think Paulex was correct to separate the process of allowing for
>>>> platform-specific tests (HARMONY-782) from any JIRA containing new
>>>> tests.
>>>>
>>> The "process" of allowing for new platform-specific tests is
>>> precisely what is being currently discussed on the dev-list in the
>>> referenced thread.
>>>
>>
>> I thought it was categorisation of tests in general.
>>
>>
>
> Hi Mark,
>
> Since "platform-specific" is one important category of test then
> discussion and agreement on the general topic is important.
>
>
>>>> The JIRA comment by Paulex mentioned that it would break two existing
>>>> JIRA issues - HARMONY-775 and HARMONY-767. I applied the former but
>>>> the
>>>> latter was already assigned to Tim and marked 'In Progress' so I didn't
>>>> feel it was right to steal it. However I have made the trivial change
>>>> to the patch metadata to fix the HARMONY-767 patch.
>>>>
>>>> Unfortunately it didn't mention the HARMONY-775 patch, otherwise I
>>>> might
>>>> have checked with you first.
>>>>
>>> It was HARMONY-755. I know, now I'm just being picky :-)
>>>
>>
>> Yes. :-)
>>
>>
>>>>> It would be great if you or Paulex (and everyone in fact) could
>>>>> comment in the "[classlib] Testing conventions - a proposal" thread
>>>>> [1] about this.
>>>>>
>>>> Certainly - though this seems to me to be orthogonal to the purpose of
>>>> the HARMONY-782 patch.
>>>>
>>> The summary of HARMONY-782 is "Relayout NIO test cases to platform
>>> dependent". That is orthogonal to the dev-list discussion on proposed
>>> test layout ??? Are you serious ??????
>>>
>>
>> Ok so maybe not orthogonal but the JIRA (regardless of the exact title)
>> was an enabler to allow additional platform-specific tests to be added.
>> And adding new tests is something that is independent of the need to
>> restructure. Or are you saying we shouldn't create any more tests (or
>> fix existing tests) until the restructuring issue is decided?
>>
>>
>
> If adding new platform-specific tests is "independent of the need to
> restructure" then why did you restructure the NIO tests ?
>
>
> No, I am not saying that we shouldn't create any more tests. No, I am
> not saying that we should stop fixing existing ones. This is not a
> restructuring issue. If anything, this is an anti-restructuring issue.
> This is about pausing to consider a different approach to the existing
> proposal for how we manage our tests. It deserves to be considered as it
> has the potential to save us all a lot of time and effort pushing files
> around.
>
>> While I see the importance of the restructuring I'm also keen not to
>> prevent the problematic nio tests to be fixed.
>>
>>
>
> Ditto. But what is the urgency here ?
>> Are you suggesting that applying the JIRA made the state of the tests
>> any worse than it was before? (I even made an effort to ensure that the
>> change was made in a way that was more consistent with the current state
>> of another module - to make it easier to programmatically fix them later
>> when the test structure issue is resolved.)
>>
>> Regards,
>> Mark.
>>
>>
>
> IMHO this is not really about just HARMONY 782 and I would be genuinely
> upset if the impression was that I was getting at you or Paulex because
> it's not true. This is about asking you, Paulex and everyone to think
> about what our tests structure is going to look like eventually, how
> much effort is going to be required to maintain its labyrinth layout,
> the amount of overhead that is going to mean for our infrastructure (Ant
> scripts, IDE metadata files etc) and whether or not we can do better.
>
>
> Best regards,
> George
>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: harmony-dev-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: harmony-dev-help@incubator.apache.org
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: harmony-dev-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: harmony-dev-help@incubator.apache.org
>
>
--
Tim Ellison (t.p.ellison@gmail.com)
IBM Java technology centre, UK.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
To unsubscribe, e-mail: harmony-dev-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: harmony-dev-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: [testing] Peace
Posted by Thorbjørn Ravn Andersen <th...@gmail.com>.
Tim Ellison skrev den 07-07-2006 00:10:
> May I tactfully suggest that we get this back to a discussion of the
> pros and cons of JUnit test suites and/or TestNG metadata vs. directory
> layout.
>
Sounds good. Then I have a question:
I have used JUnit 3 somewhat for test-driven development, and found it
well integrated in eclipse.
Is the features of TestNG so overwhelmingly better than JUnit (both 3
and 4) that they merit using it, despite that more developers know JUnit?
Lets hear it from the elders themselves :)
--
Thorbjørn
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
To unsubscribe, e-mail: harmony-dev-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: harmony-dev-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: [testing] Peace
Posted by George Harley <ge...@googlemail.com>.
Tim Ellison wrote:
> May I tactfully suggest that we get this back to a discussion of the
> pros and cons of JUnit test suites and/or TestNG metadata vs. directory
> layout.
>
> It sounds like we all want to resolve that problem asap.
>
> Regards,
> Tim
>
>
+1
--
George
> George Harley wrote:
>
>> Mark Hindess wrote:
>>
>>> On 6 July 2006 at 18:05, George Harley
>>> <ge...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> Mark Hindess wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> On 6 July 2006 at 12:55, George Harley <ge...@googlemail.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi Mark,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> From what I can tell this JIRA hasn't really achieved much apart
>>>>>> from pushing code around the repository and breaking at least one
>>>>>> patch (HARMONY-755).
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> Well, obviously that wasn't my motivation! ;-)
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> Hi Mark,
>>>>
>>>> No one was saying it was. BTW, good to hear you have some motivation :-)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> >From the description, it was clear (to me anyway) that the patch
>>>>> was to
>>>>> enable the use of platform-specific test code. While the directories
>>>>> for the platform-specific test code are currently empty, I'm certain
>>>>> Paulex plans to rectify this pretty soon.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> Creating empty directories is not the issue here. The patch also
>>>> entailed moving a whole bunch of other files around the source tree
>>>> for reasons that are currently being discussed in the dev list.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> I think Paulex was correct to separate the process of allowing for
>>>>> platform-specific tests (HARMONY-782) from any JIRA containing new
>>>>> tests.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> The "process" of allowing for new platform-specific tests is
>>>> precisely what is being currently discussed on the dev-list in the
>>>> referenced thread.
>>>>
>>>>
>>> I thought it was categorisation of tests in general.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> Hi Mark,
>>
>> Since "platform-specific" is one important category of test then
>> discussion and agreement on the general topic is important.
>>
>>
>>
>>>>> The JIRA comment by Paulex mentioned that it would break two existing
>>>>> JIRA issues - HARMONY-775 and HARMONY-767. I applied the former but
>>>>> the
>>>>> latter was already assigned to Tim and marked 'In Progress' so I didn't
>>>>> feel it was right to steal it. However I have made the trivial change
>>>>> to the patch metadata to fix the HARMONY-767 patch.
>>>>>
>>>>> Unfortunately it didn't mention the HARMONY-775 patch, otherwise I
>>>>> might
>>>>> have checked with you first.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> It was HARMONY-755. I know, now I'm just being picky :-)
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Yes. :-)
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>>> It would be great if you or Paulex (and everyone in fact) could
>>>>>> comment in the "[classlib] Testing conventions - a proposal" thread
>>>>>> [1] about this.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> Certainly - though this seems to me to be orthogonal to the purpose of
>>>>> the HARMONY-782 patch.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> The summary of HARMONY-782 is "Relayout NIO test cases to platform
>>>> dependent". That is orthogonal to the dev-list discussion on proposed
>>>> test layout ??? Are you serious ??????
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Ok so maybe not orthogonal but the JIRA (regardless of the exact title)
>>> was an enabler to allow additional platform-specific tests to be added.
>>> And adding new tests is something that is independent of the need to
>>> restructure. Or are you saying we shouldn't create any more tests (or
>>> fix existing tests) until the restructuring issue is decided?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> If adding new platform-specific tests is "independent of the need to
>> restructure" then why did you restructure the NIO tests ?
>>
>>
>> No, I am not saying that we shouldn't create any more tests. No, I am
>> not saying that we should stop fixing existing ones. This is not a
>> restructuring issue. If anything, this is an anti-restructuring issue.
>> This is about pausing to consider a different approach to the existing
>> proposal for how we manage our tests. It deserves to be considered as it
>> has the potential to save us all a lot of time and effort pushing files
>> around.
>>
>>
>>> While I see the importance of the restructuring I'm also keen not to
>>> prevent the problematic nio tests to be fixed.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> Ditto. But what is the urgency here ?
>>
>>> Are you suggesting that applying the JIRA made the state of the tests
>>> any worse than it was before? (I even made an effort to ensure that the
>>> change was made in a way that was more consistent with the current state
>>> of another module - to make it easier to programmatically fix them later
>>> when the test structure issue is resolved.)
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Mark.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> IMHO this is not really about just HARMONY 782 and I would be genuinely
>> upset if the impression was that I was getting at you or Paulex because
>> it's not true. This is about asking you, Paulex and everyone to think
>> about what our tests structure is going to look like eventually, how
>> much effort is going to be required to maintain its labyrinth layout,
>> the amount of overhead that is going to mean for our infrastructure (Ant
>> scripts, IDE metadata files etc) and whether or not we can do better.
>>
>>
>> Best regards,
>> George
>>
>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: harmony-dev-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: harmony-dev-help@incubator.apache.org
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: harmony-dev-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: harmony-dev-help@incubator.apache.org
>>
>>
>>
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
To unsubscribe, e-mail: harmony-dev-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: harmony-dev-help@incubator.apache.org