[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-3748?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ]
Bob Morley updated OFBIZ-3748: ------------------------------ Summary: Remove test specific code in the GenericDelegator (was: Remove test specific code in the GeneralDelegator) > Remove test specific code in the GenericDelegator > ------------------------------------------------- > > Key: OFBIZ-3748 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-3748 > Project: OFBiz > Issue Type: Bug > Components: framework > Affects Versions: SVN trunk > Reporter: Bob Morley > Attachments: OFBIZ-3748_TestGenericDelegator.patch > > > Adam -- This is the results from our conversation on consistent rolling back > of unit testers. We talked about moving the logic that is in the > GenericDelegator that is specific to testing into a sub-class. This patch is > NOT meant to be merged at this time, I wanted to put it up for review before > I continue down this path ... > Here are the key pieces: > - TestGenericDelegator - test version of a generic delegator that contains > the ability to record the list of database operations and then > programmatically roll them back in reverse order. This was from existing > code in GenericDelegator. > - TestDelegatorFactoryImpl - a new service implementation of DelegatoryFactor > that will construct instances of TestGenericDelegator. > Things to consider: > - Should rollback be on the Delegator interface? I sort of field it should > not be there; but I left it there for now with GenericDelegator reporting an > error if it is called. > - Since there are two implementations of the DelegatorFactory there needs to > be a way to determine which one to use; the way I have done this in the past > is through configuration. Usually something like ... > service.org.ofbiz.entity.DelegatorFactory=org.ofbiz.entity.DelegatorFactoryImpl > that could (for Ofbiz) be placed in the start.properties or test.properties > file. However, looking at the factory unit tester it looks like each factory > should be able to determine if it is applicable based on the incoming > parameters. As a result (until more discussion) I have made a choice based > on the delegator name -- I know this is clearly NOT the go forward method. > But would like some suggestions here ... was considering a new attribute on > the entityengine.xml delegator definition, but there should be some mechanism > to be able to provide control over which implementation is used I would think > ... > - I got an inkling that "base delegator name" may not be required anymore. > This is because I no longer create the standard delegator and then "clone" to > a test version. I simply instantiate the proper version right up front ... > Moreover, I let the delegator / dispatcher names be as they are (not adding a > random alpha-numeric suffix). Not sure about this, did not research further. > Go forward plan -- > - If there are agreement on these changes and a resolution for things to > consider point #2 above, I would then re-code my standalone rollback base > class for unit tests to leverage this functionality. This would ensure we > consistently rollback regardless of executing the test directly or through > the test infrastructure. -- This message is automatically generated by JIRA. - You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.