On Jan 29, 2007, at 10:58 PM, Al Byers wrote:
Could this be a matter of differing requirements? I am guessing that onecould think of testing as a means to insure that the core code isfunctioning properly. I realize that I was thinking about what I would wantfrom a project management point of view. In that case, I think my requirements would be:1. Something that would let me jump around and assess the state of multipleprojects. That would imply that I do not want to use a command-lineinterface. I don't want to have to log in to different systems. I wouldwant to see the available tests and pick all or some of them.2. If I want to check the state of a task, I want to be able to run a test that is appropriate for that task whether it be an acceptance test on the response to a request or an internal test on business logic functionality. I would like the same command interface for all tests. Of course, WebTest doesnot have such an interface, but it does not seem like it would be toodifficult to glean the available tests and descriptions from the ant scriptfiles.
It's way easy to do this in ant - I have a bunch of examples for this somewhere in my build files. I can pull it together whenever you're ready Al. It doesn't prompt you though (but it could still be VERY easy to control with arguments being passed in)
I see WebTest as a vehicle for doing the above. It is designed for web-based tests, but it seems like with a little work it could also be a harness for running JUnit tests. Perhaps a special event handler for running JUnit testsand another for wrapping web requests with a transaction. Let me try again at refining my wish list: 1. A prompting interface. 2. The ability to run all tests from that interface. -Al On 1/29/07, David E. Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:I'd really prefer to do what has been proposed as a best practice and write tests using the same OFBiz framework tools that we use to write applications, like simple-methods, services, etc... But yes, it is possible to call a service through a web request and there is one in the webtools wecapp that has been there for years. The trick is you have to set export="true" for all services called this way, which is another reason to do logic-level test (including service calls) in a more black-box way, especially if they are not for testing things that are intended to be available externally. -David On Jan 29, 2007, at 4:01 AM, Andrew Sykes wrote:> Assuming an automated web browser type technology is the way to go for> testing... > > What does everyone think of having an option to run a service > synchronously from webtools? > > This would allow a lot of clever asserts from the test tool? > Without the > need to make the tool dispatcher aware? Would this be an adequate > approach? > -- > Kind Regards > Andrew Sykes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sykes Development Ltd > http://www.sykesdevelopment.com >
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
