You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@maven.apache.org by Vincent Massol <vm...@pivolis.com> on 2006/01/23 17:02:35 UTC
[PROPOSAL] Integration testing proposal for Maven 2.0.x
Hi,
In order to progress on the topic of integration testing, I'm proposing the
following strategy that we can implement immediately:
* We add one new <integrationTestSourceDirectory> element to the POM
(similar to the current <testSourceDirectory> element but for integration
tests)
* We make it default to src/test-integration.
* We create a new surefire:test-integration MOJO bound to the
integration-test lifecycle
* We implement this for Maven 2.0.3.
Let me know if that's ok and I'll try to implement it.
Thanks
-Vincent
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
Re: [PROPOSAL] Integration testing proposal for Maven 2.0.x
Posted by David Sag <ds...@epo.org>.
I prefer 'itest' to 'it', and prefer 'integration' even more.
Kind regards,
Dave Sag
Tomasz Pik <to...@gmail.com> wrote on 26-01-2006 23:21:50:
> On 26/01/06, Brett Porter <br...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > I have the following concerns:
> > - adding an "it" scope. I haven't seen explained how this will behave,
> > nor the impact on existing plugins.
>
> Maybe 'itest' (instead of 'it') will be easier to understand for those,
who
> see it for the first time?
>
> Regards,
> Tomek
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
>
Re: [PROPOSAL] Integration testing proposal for Maven 2.0.x
Posted by Tomasz Pik <to...@gmail.com>.
On 26/01/06, Brett Porter <br...@apache.org> wrote:
> I have the following concerns:
> - adding an "it" scope. I haven't seen explained how this will behave,
> nor the impact on existing plugins.
Maybe 'itest' (instead of 'it') will be easier to understand for those, who
see it for the first time?
Regards,
Tomek
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
Re: [PROPOSAL] Integration testing proposal for Maven 2.0.x
Posted by Brett Porter <br...@apache.org>.
Vincent Massol wrote:
> I've just updated
> http://docs.codehaus.org/display/MAVEN/best+practices+-+testing+strategies
>
> Let me know if you have questions about what's there.
Thanks, I'll take a look when I have a clearer head.
- Brett
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
RE: [PROPOSAL] Integration testing proposal for Maven 2.0.x
Posted by Vincent Massol <vm...@pivolis.com>.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Brett Porter [mailto:brett@apache.org]
> Sent: jeudi 26 janvier 2006 22:14
> To: Maven Developers List
> Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] Integration testing proposal for Maven 2.0.x
>
> Vincent,
>
> There's a huge difference. Anything that goes into 2.0.3 must be made
> compatible. If it lands on trunk we can have a longer testing period and
> get people involved, and completely change it if it doesn't work out.
>
> I have the following concerns:
> - adding an "it" scope. I haven't seen explained how this will behave,
> nor the impact on existing plugins.
> - adding something to the POM. I'm not sure the code is equipped to deal
> with an upgraded POM version yet. It's something we were aware needed to
> be done for 2.1.
> - Are we still adding another set of tests (something formerly called
> functional), or is it just two levels?
>
> Here's what I propose:
> - formalise this in the wiki, cover as much as possible
I've just updated
http://docs.codehaus.org/display/MAVEN/best+practices+-+testing+strategies
Let me know if you have questions about what's there.
> - when it comes to implementation, do it on trunk. Keep track of the
> revisions and once we are 100% happy with it there, backport it to 2.0.3
> and confirm it is stable there.
I'd love to do it but I've realized I still have lots of work on the m2
book's chapter. We need to decide where I spend my time and if someone can
help. Let's discuss this offline.
Thanks
-Vincent
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
Re: [PROPOSAL] Integration testing proposal for Maven 2.0.x
Posted by Brett Porter <br...@apache.org>.
Vincent,
There's a huge difference. Anything that goes into 2.0.3 must be made
compatible. If it lands on trunk we can have a longer testing period and
get people involved, and completely change it if it doesn't work out.
I have the following concerns:
- adding an "it" scope. I haven't seen explained how this will behave,
nor the impact on existing plugins.
- adding something to the POM. I'm not sure the code is equipped to deal
with an upgraded POM version yet. It's something we were aware needed to
be done for 2.1.
- Are we still adding another set of tests (something formerly called
functional), or is it just two levels?
Here's what I propose:
- formalise this in the wiki, cover as much as possible
- when it comes to implementation, do it on trunk. Keep track of the
revisions and once we are 100% happy with it there, backport it to 2.0.3
and confirm it is stable there.
Does this sound ok?
- Brett
Vincent Massol wrote:
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Brett Porter [mailto:brett@apache.org]
>> Sent: mercredi 25 janvier 2006 00:38
>> To: Maven Developers List
>> Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] Integration testing proposal for Maven 2.0.x
>>
>> +1 for src/it
>>
>> I've got to say I'm greatly hesitant to add new things to 2.0.3, but it
>> wouldn't be the first time. Be careful :)
>>
>> How sure are we that this will be the final solution - are new test
>> types needed?
>
> We're not sure at all! :-) I would even say that it's pretty sure that over
> time the design and implementation solution will change. Which is why I
> think it's good for the 2.0.x series: we're not changing any existing user
> interface (only adding to them) and we're following the same spirit as the
> current strategy for unit tests.
>
> It's possible that we'll need to change that in Maven 2.1.x series but the
> best way to know is to implement what I suggest in 2.0.3 and get feedback.
>
>> Just trying to get a grip on where we are at with the topic as a whole.
>
> Thanks.
> -Vincent
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
RE: [PROPOSAL] Integration testing proposal for Maven 2.0.x
Posted by Vincent Massol <vm...@pivolis.com>.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Brett Porter [mailto:brett@apache.org]
> Sent: mercredi 25 janvier 2006 00:38
> To: Maven Developers List
> Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] Integration testing proposal for Maven 2.0.x
>
> +1 for src/it
>
> I've got to say I'm greatly hesitant to add new things to 2.0.3, but it
> wouldn't be the first time. Be careful :)
>
> How sure are we that this will be the final solution - are new test
> types needed?
We're not sure at all! :-) I would even say that it's pretty sure that over
time the design and implementation solution will change. Which is why I
think it's good for the 2.0.x series: we're not changing any existing user
interface (only adding to them) and we're following the same spirit as the
current strategy for unit tests.
It's possible that we'll need to change that in Maven 2.1.x series but the
best way to know is to implement what I suggest in 2.0.3 and get feedback.
> Just trying to get a grip on where we are at with the topic as a whole.
Thanks.
-Vincent
> Vincent Massol wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > In order to progress on the topic of integration testing, I'm proposing
> the
> > following strategy that we can implement immediately:
> >
> > * We add one new <integrationTestSourceDirectory> element to the POM
> > (similar to the current <testSourceDirectory> element but for
> integration
> > tests)
> >
> > * We make it default to src/test-integration.
> >
> > * We create a new surefire:test-integration MOJO bound to the
> > integration-test lifecycle
> >
> > * We implement this for Maven 2.0.3.
> >
> > Let me know if that's ok and I'll try to implement it.
> >
> > Thanks
> > -Vincent
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
> >
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
Re: [PROPOSAL] Integration testing proposal for Maven 2.0.x
Posted by Brett Porter <br...@apache.org>.
+1 for src/it
I've got to say I'm greatly hesitant to add new things to 2.0.3, but it
wouldn't be the first time. Be careful :)
How sure are we that this will be the final solution - are new test
types needed?
Just trying to get a grip on where we are at with the topic as a whole.
- Brett
Vincent Massol wrote:
> Hi,
>
> In order to progress on the topic of integration testing, I'm proposing the
> following strategy that we can implement immediately:
>
> * We add one new <integrationTestSourceDirectory> element to the POM
> (similar to the current <testSourceDirectory> element but for integration
> tests)
>
> * We make it default to src/test-integration.
>
> * We create a new surefire:test-integration MOJO bound to the
> integration-test lifecycle
>
> * We implement this for Maven 2.0.3.
>
> Let me know if that's ok and I'll try to implement it.
>
> Thanks
> -Vincent
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
Re: [PROPOSAL] Integration testing proposal for Maven 2.0.x
Posted by Vincent Siveton <vi...@gmail.com>.
+1
Agree with Jason for src/it
Thanks for this improvement.
Vincent
2006/1/23, Vincent Massol <vm...@pivolis.com>:
> Hi,
>
> In order to progress on the topic of integration testing, I'm proposing the
> following strategy that we can implement immediately:
>
> * We add one new <integrationTestSourceDirectory> element to the POM
> (similar to the current <testSourceDirectory> element but for integration
> tests)
>
> * We make it default to src/test-integration.
>
> * We create a new surefire:test-integration MOJO bound to the
> integration-test lifecycle
>
> * We implement this for Maven 2.0.3.
>
> Let me know if that's ok and I'll try to implement it.
>
> Thanks
> -Vincent
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
Re: [PROPOSAL] Integration testing proposal for Maven 2.0.x
Posted by Carlos Sanchez <ca...@apache.org>.
+1 to src/it
-1 to 2.0.3, I'd rather have a stable 2.0.x without new features and
have a early 2.1 with the new stuff postponing new features not
implemented to 2.2
On 1/23/06, Vincent Massol <vm...@pivolis.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> In order to progress on the topic of integration testing, I'm proposing the
> following strategy that we can implement immediately:
>
> * We add one new <integrationTestSourceDirectory> element to the POM
> (similar to the current <testSourceDirectory> element but for integration
> tests)
>
> * We make it default to src/test-integration.
>
> * We create a new surefire:test-integration MOJO bound to the
> integration-test lifecycle
>
> * We implement this for Maven 2.0.3.
>
> Let me know if that's ok and I'll try to implement it.
>
> Thanks
> -Vincent
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
Re: [PROPOSAL] Integration testing proposal for Maven 2.0.x
Posted by Emmanuel Venisse <em...@venisse.net>.
+1
Emmanuel
Vincent Massol a écrit :
> Hi,
>
> In order to progress on the topic of integration testing, I'm proposing the
> following strategy that we can implement immediately:
>
> * We add one new <integrationTestSourceDirectory> element to the POM
> (similar to the current <testSourceDirectory> element but for integration
> tests)
>
> * We make it default to src/test-integration.
>
> * We create a new surefire:test-integration MOJO bound to the
> integration-test lifecycle
>
> * We implement this for Maven 2.0.3.
>
> Let me know if that's ok and I'll try to implement it.
>
> Thanks
> -Vincent
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
>
>
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
Re: [PROPOSAL] Integration testing proposal for Maven 2.0.x
Posted by Eric Redmond <er...@gmail.com>.
If the POM is changing, that would then increment the pom model version,
right? To 4.0.1?
On 1/25/06, Vincent Massol <vm...@pivolis.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Grzegorz Slowikowski [mailto:gslowikowski@op.pl]
> > Sent: mardi 24 janvier 2006 11:12
> > To: Maven Developers List
> > Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] Integration testing proposal for Maven 2.0.x
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Vincent Massol" <vm...@pivolis.com>
> > To: "'Maven Developers List'" <de...@maven.apache.org>
> > Sent: Monday, January 23, 2006 5:02 PM
> > Subject: [PROPOSAL] Integration testing proposal for Maven 2.0.x
> >
> >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > ...
> > > * We create a new surefire:test-integration MOJO bound to the
> > > integration-test lifecycle
> > >
> > You meant "integration-test PHASE"?
>
> Yes. I actually meant "integration-test lifecycle phase" ;-)
>
> > And in what phase will integration tests be compiled? Now we compile
> them
> > (with our own plugin) in test-compile, but I think it is to early (if
> you
> > want only
> > invoke "mvn package", you don't need it compilation).
>
> I think it can be done in 2 implementation steps. My first implementation
> idea was to do it in test-compile and possibly add the new
> integration-test-compile phase later on, with resources phase, etc too.
>
> > Another "problem" with it compilation is that all our testing artifacts
> > needed by
> > integration tests, and not by unit tests have scope "test". There is not
> > "it" scope.
> > So they all (there are really many artifacts needed by cactus)
>
> Come on, not that many jars! :-)
>
> > are included in classpath for unit tests. Are we going to do something
> to
> > avoid this, or is it ok?
>
> I agree with you. We'd need an it scope.
>
> I've created the following JIRA issues:
> http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MSUREFIRE-50
> http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MNG-2009
> http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MNG-2010
> http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MNG-2011
>
> Thanks
> -Vincent
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
>
>
RE: [PROPOSAL] Integration testing proposal for Maven 2.0.x
Posted by Vincent Massol <vm...@pivolis.com>.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Grzegorz Slowikowski [mailto:gslowikowski@op.pl]
> Sent: mardi 24 janvier 2006 11:12
> To: Maven Developers List
> Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] Integration testing proposal for Maven 2.0.x
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Vincent Massol" <vm...@pivolis.com>
> To: "'Maven Developers List'" <de...@maven.apache.org>
> Sent: Monday, January 23, 2006 5:02 PM
> Subject: [PROPOSAL] Integration testing proposal for Maven 2.0.x
>
>
> > Hi,
> >
> ...
> > * We create a new surefire:test-integration MOJO bound to the
> > integration-test lifecycle
> >
> You meant "integration-test PHASE"?
Yes. I actually meant "integration-test lifecycle phase" ;-)
> And in what phase will integration tests be compiled? Now we compile them
> (with our own plugin) in test-compile, but I think it is to early (if you
> want only
> invoke "mvn package", you don't need it compilation).
I think it can be done in 2 implementation steps. My first implementation
idea was to do it in test-compile and possibly add the new
integration-test-compile phase later on, with resources phase, etc too.
> Another "problem" with it compilation is that all our testing artifacts
> needed by
> integration tests, and not by unit tests have scope "test". There is not
> "it" scope.
> So they all (there are really many artifacts needed by cactus)
Come on, not that many jars! :-)
> are included in classpath for unit tests. Are we going to do something to
> avoid this, or is it ok?
I agree with you. We'd need an it scope.
I've created the following JIRA issues:
http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MSUREFIRE-50
http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MNG-2009
http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MNG-2010
http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MNG-2011
Thanks
-Vincent
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
Re: [PROPOSAL] Integration testing proposal for Maven 2.0.x
Posted by Grzegorz Slowikowski <gs...@op.pl>.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Vincent Massol" <vm...@pivolis.com>
To: "'Maven Developers List'" <de...@maven.apache.org>
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2006 5:02 PM
Subject: [PROPOSAL] Integration testing proposal for Maven 2.0.x
> Hi,
>
...
> * We create a new surefire:test-integration MOJO bound to the
> integration-test lifecycle
>
You meant "integration-test PHASE"?
And in what phase will integration tests be compiled? Now we compile them
(with our own plugin) in test-compile, but I think it is to early (if you
want only
invoke "mvn package", you don't need it compilation).
Another "problem" with it compilation is that all our testing artifacts
needed by
integration tests, and not by unit tests have scope "test". There is not
"it" scope.
So they all (there are really many artifacts needed by cactus) are included
in
classpath for unit tests. Are we going to do something to avoid this, or is
it ok?
Greg
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
Re: [PROPOSAL] Integration testing proposal for Maven 2.0.x
Posted by Jason van Zyl <ja...@maven.org>.
Vincent Massol wrote:
> Hi,
>
> In order to progress on the topic of integration testing, I'm proposing the
> following strategy that we can implement immediately:
>
> * We add one new <integrationTestSourceDirectory> element to the POM
> (similar to the current <testSourceDirectory> element but for integration
> tests)
+1
I think we need the definition in the POM for the same reason that we
have it for the test source directory whereby at least two plug-ins
needs to get at that location (compile, surefire). Having the analog for
integration tests seems reasonable.
> * We make it default to src/test-integration.
I think right now we're using src/it in many places. I'm not picky here,
whatever is more clear.
> * We create a new surefire:test-integration MOJO bound to the
> integration-test lifecycle
+1
Again, an analog to the standard testing makes sense.
> * We implement this for Maven 2.0.3.
+1
If you want to implement it :-)
If we have a consensus feel free to add the issues to 2.0.3 and assign
them to yourself. The plan is to try for the 2.0.3 in ~30 days.
> Let me know if that's ok and I'll try to implement it.
>
> Thanks
> -Vincent
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
>
>
>
--
jvz.
Jason van Zyl
jason at maven.org
http://maven.apache.org
Simplex sigillum veri. (Simplicity is the seal of truth.)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org