You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@bigtop.apache.org by "jay vyas (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org> on 2014/05/20 01:53:38 UTC

[jira] [Created] (BIGTOP-1315) Pig smoke tests: Refactor ?

jay vyas created BIGTOP-1315:
--------------------------------

             Summary: Pig smoke tests:  Refactor ?
                 Key: BIGTOP-1315
                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BIGTOP-1315
             Project: Bigtop
          Issue Type: Bug
          Components: Tests
            Reporter: jay vyas
            Assignee: jay vyas
             Fix For: 0.9.0


The pig tests which we ship are only running the TestPigTest and TestGruntParser tests.

As usual, I'll make my trademark statement :) 

1) Is all the indirection of including a jar file maintained externally really worth it for two simple tests, neither of  which are customizable, and both of which run on very small data sets, built for  a local machine only ? We can easily maintain our own Itest based groovy tests in the Style of BIGTOP-1222.    Would be easier for others to use and adopt.   

The second test "TestGruntParser" doesnt really seem like it should even run inside of bigtop, should it?

2) If we still do want to keep using the artifacts from pigsmoke, for now we will need to upgrade to pigsmoke 0.12.1.

My personal opinion (if you havent already guessed...) is that I think pig's definition of a "smoke" test isnt quite the same as ours (unless im missing something), so id like to think some more about (1), as a possible option / alternative. :)



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.2#6252)