On 11/12/2009, at 11:02 PM, Erwan de FERRIERES wrote:
But if we just stay on the services, this vould give a great overview of their coverage. As we are in a SOA system, and service is the most important part of the system, we have to be sure they are tested.
The easiest way to achieve something like this might be to try and extend/adapt the ArtifactInfo stuff to do it. It could inspect each test case for service calls and report on the service coverage based on that. We could make it so that it doesn't dig too deep and only reports on services that are called directly from the test case and not services that are called as a consequence of the service call e.g. ECAs, inline service calls, etc.
Of course it wouldn't be able to report on the actual line coverage of the service call but combined with Adam's report it might start to give us better overall picture.
For all user interface testing, validation could be done via storylines and scenarios, with expected results after an action, as David described in UBPL, for the user point of view.From: "Erwan de FERRIERES" <erwan.de-ferrie...@nereide.biz>Now the point would be to show the coverage of the simple methods andalso, maybe in sometime, the selenium coverage. What would be great is finding a way to indicate which services are tested, and then display it in the webtools. This won't give an information as precise as cobertura but would add some quick display on what is or can be tested.If we agree on a syntax to use, I would be ready to add the screen inOFBiz. Cheers, Le 11/12/2009 00:21, Scott Gray a écrit : ../..-- Erwan de FERRIERES www.nereide.biz-- Erwan de FERRIERES www.nereide.biz
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
