Stas had a really good writeup in the comments here: https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/2077.
Stas, were you planning on adding this writeup to the Testing Guide on the website? On Mon, Mar 27, 2017 at 11:55 AM, Eugene Kirpichov < kirpic...@google.com.invalid> wrote: > Kenn - can you also remind for everybody, what is the difference between > @NeedsRunner and @ValidatesRunner, and when should one use one or the > other? I always find myself confused about this especially in code reviews. > > On Mon, Mar 27, 2017 at 11:32 AM Kenneth Knowles <k...@google.com.invalid> > wrote: > > > Hi all, > > > > I just merged the rename from RunnableOnService to ValidatesRunner in the > > Java codebase (Python was already there) > > https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/2157. > > > > I'm sure there will be stragglers throughout our docs, etc, so please do > > help me catch them and fix them. And start learning to say > > "ValidatesRunner" in conversation :-) > > > > Kenn > > > > On Thu, Nov 10, 2016 at 1:01 PM, Lukasz Cwik <lc...@google.com.invalid> > > wrote: > > > > > The default is a crashing runner which throws an exception if its > > executed. > > > This makes SDK core/examples/... not depend on any implemented runners. > > > > > > On Thu, Nov 10, 2016 at 12:37 PM, Robert Bradshaw < > > > rober...@google.com.invalid> wrote: > > > > > > > +1 to ValidatesRunner. I'd be nice if it were (optionally?) > > > > parameterized by which feature it validates. > > > > > > > > @NeedsRunner is odd, as using a runner is the most natural way to > > > > write many (most) tests, but an annotation should be used to mark the > > > > exception, not the norm. (I'd just assume a runner is available for > > > > all tests, e.g. CoreTests depends on DirectRunner depends on Core). > > > > > > > > On Thu, Nov 10, 2016 at 10:14 AM, Mark Liu > <mark...@google.com.invalid > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > +1 ValidatesRunner > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Nov 10, 2016 at 8:40 AM, Kenneth Knowles > > > <k...@google.com.invalid > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > >> Nice. I like ValidatesRunner. > > > > >> > > > > >> On Nov 10, 2016 03:39, "Amit Sela" <amitsel...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > >> > > > > >> > How about @ValidatesRunner ? > > > > >> > Seems to complement @NeedsRunner as well. > > > > >> > > > > > >> > On Thu, Nov 10, 2016 at 9:47 AM Aljoscha Krettek < > > > aljos...@apache.org > > > > > > > > > >> > wrote: > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > +1 > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > What I would really like to see is automatic derivation of the > > > > >> capability > > > > >> > > matrix from an extended Runner Test Suite. (As outlined in > > Thomas' > > > > >> doc). > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > On Wed, 9 Nov 2016 at 21:42 Kenneth Knowles > > > <k...@google.com.invalid > > > > > > > > > >> > > wrote: > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > Huge +1 to this. > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > The two categories I care most about are: > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > 1. Tests that need a runner, but are testing the other > "thing > > > > under > > > > >> > > test"; > > > > >> > > > today this is NeedsRunner. > > > > >> > > > 2. Tests that are intended to test a runner; today this is > > > > >> > > > RunnableOnService. > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > Actually the lines are not necessary clear between them, > but I > > > > think > > > > >> we > > > > >> > > can > > > > >> > > > make good choices, like we already do. > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > The idea of two categories with a common superclass actually > > > has a > > > > >> > > pitfall: > > > > >> > > > what if a test is put in the superclass category, when it > does > > > not > > > > >> > have a > > > > >> > > > clear meaning? And also, I don't have any good ideas for > > names. > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > So I think just replacing RunnableOnService with RunnerTest > to > > > > make > > > > >> > clear > > > > >> > > > that it is there just to test the runner is good. We might > > also > > > > want > > > > >> > > > RunnerIntegrationTest extends NeedsRunner to use in the IO > > > > modules. > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > See also Thomas's doc on capability matrix testing* which is > > > > aimed at > > > > >> > > case > > > > >> > > > 2. Those tests should all have a category from the doc, or a > > new > > > > one > > > > >> > > added. > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > * > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > https://docs.google.com/document/d/1fICxq32t9yWn9qXhmT07xpclHeHX2 > > > > >> > VlUyVtpi2WzzGM/edit > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > Kenn > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > On Wed, Nov 9, 2016 at 12:20 PM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré < > > > > >> j...@nanthrax.net > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > wrote: > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > Hi Mark, > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > Generally speaking, I agree. > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > As RunnableOnService extends NeedsRunner, @TestsWithRunner > > or > > > > >> > > > @RunOnRunner > > > > >> > > > > sound clearer. > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > Regards > > > > >> > > > > JB > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > On 11/09/2016 09:00 PM, Mark Liu wrote: > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > >> Hi all, > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> I'm working on building RunnableOnService in Python SDK. > > > After > > > > >> > having > > > > >> > > > >> discussions with folks, "RunnableOnService" looks like > not > > a > > > > very > > > > >> > > > >> intuitive > > > > >> > > > >> name for those unit tests that require runners and build > > > > >> lightweight > > > > >> > > > >> pipelines to test specific components. Especially, they > > don't > > > > have > > > > >> > to > > > > >> > > > run > > > > >> > > > >> on a service. > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> So I want to raise this idea to the community and see if > > > anyone > > > > >> have > > > > >> > > > >> similar thoughts. Maybe we can come up with a name this > is > > > > tight > > > > >> to > > > > >> > > > >> runner. > > > > >> > > > >> Currently, I have two names in my head: > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> - TestsWithRunners > > > > >> > > > >> - RunnerExecutable > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> Any thoughts? > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> Thanks, > > > > >> > > > >> Mark > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > -- > > > > >> > > > > Jean-Baptiste Onofré > > > > >> > > > > jbono...@apache.org > > > > >> > > > > http://blog.nanthrax.net > > > > >> > > > > Talend - http://www.talend.com > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > -- ------- Jason Kuster Apache Beam / Google Cloud Dataflow
