I haven't looked at TestNG, so I don;t have a strong opinion either way.
Does TestNG allow you to produce a report of all tests tagged as
@excluded (or whatever)? so we can easily see which tests are excluded |
run on a particular platform | whatever? I would think that'd be useful.
Regards,
Tim
Sean Qiu wrote:
Interesting. So we can upgrade to Junit 4.4 more smoothly or without any pains.
But what can we benefit from the upgrading?
Get 6 annotations to run tests and hamcrest assertions.
IMHO, this can not solve any of our problems that TestNG can.
Or we wait until Junit 4 include groups annotations?
2008/6/13 Nathan Beyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
On Thu, Jun 12, 2008 at 10:13 PM, Sean Qiu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
2008/6/12 Sian January <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
This is slightly off track, but my concern about TestNG is that there are
already quite a lot of steps for someone new to Harmony to get the source
code and run the tests (both for the whole of Harmony and for a single
class
library module). Certainly for Eclipse users if we switched to TestNG
this
would add another step, although I'm not sure about command-line users.
The cost to make use of current tests is low, IMHO.
I have mentioned that we can add TestNG target to replace Junit target.
From the command-line users' perspective, they still use the same
command to run the test.
The only difference would be the command will invoke TestNG to run our
test.
For Eclipse users, they can adopt plug-in for TestNG, it is quite the
same as plug-in for junit.
So I think we can migration to TestNG smoothly for the user.
What's more, they can pick up their desired tests more conveniently.
For test developers, on the other hand, it is a little complex.
But we want to upgrade to a new tool, no matter Junit 4 or TestNG, we
need to pay for it.Their efforts are similar.
Actually, we can use JUnit 4 now. If you run with Ant 1.7 and put the JUnit
4 library that's in the dependency download already into your Ant classpath,
JUnit 4 tests will run. You can even mix JUnit 3 and 4 tests in the same run
and it works fine, so new test classes can be built at JUnit 4 tests without
having to update any existing test code. You can even use some of the
minimal built-in hamcrest matchers, as they are part of the JUnit 4.4 JAR.
-Nathan
For TestNG, we need add annotations for each testcase, classify them
to right groups.
The good news is we still can use original assert* as before since
TestNG include JUnit's Assert class.
As Nathan mentioned , we can use hamcrest as well if we want.
Of course if switching to TestNG solves some really major problems then
it
would probably be worth it, but the only thing I can see that it gives us
over JUnit 4 is being able to run different sets of tests on different
OS's
and to me that doesn't seem as important as having a project that's easy
to
access. Just my 2p worth...
We can replace the exclude files to get a more accurate tracking for
failed test.
We can tell difference between public API tests and harmony specific
implementation tests .
We can archive all tests together into a jar.
I think there should be other benefits as well :)
--
Best Regards
Sean, Xiao Xia Qiu
China Software Development Lab, IBM
