Hi, I had a look at the ext/pojogen-maven-plugin module.
There we have three integration tests. In the src/it folder we have exchangeMail exchangeMailNoBasePkg and finally v4Sample which is another service but tests the same thing as exchangeMail namely the construction of a V4 service which contains a base package. I would like to delete the v4Sample test. Are there any objections or points that I have missed? Best Regards, Christian -----Original Message----- From: Francesco Chicchiriccò [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Freitag, 12. August 2016 10:27 To: [email protected] Subject: Re: Cleaning up V4 fit tests On 12/08/2016 09:36, Amend, Christian wrote: > Hi Francesco, > > yes I will definitely keep the parts which are not yet covered by the Olingo > server part like delta handling. > I am only talking about the duplicates like basic CRUD scenarios. > > Also do you know why there are 3 different proxy services in the fit module? > These are the three I am talking about: > org.apache.olingo.fit.proxy.demo > org.apache.olingo.fit.proxy.opentype > org.apache.olingo.fit.proxy.staticservice > > If they test the same things with different service we might be able to clean > this up. WDYT? Not sure: it seems to me that they are testing different things: demo and staticservice are quite general, opentype checks open type support. Hence, I don't believe that consolidating would be trivial, in this case. Regards. > -----Original Message----- > From: Francesco Chicchiriccò [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Donnerstag, 11. August 2016 16:11 > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: Cleaning up V4 fit tests > > On 11/08/2016 16:06, Amend, Christian wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> I would like to clean up our tests and remove duplicates in the FIT module. >> Especially the ones using the static server content since the idea of "full >> integration tests" in my opinion is the usage of client and server library >> and not the testing the client with a static server content. >> >> WDYT? If there are no objections I will go ahead with the refactoring. I >> will go with small steps so we can easily revert changes. > AFAIR the static services were provided at the time where Olingo Server > V4 had almost no features: now that things have changed, I don't see any > problems in removing the static parts which have dynamic counterparts. > > Please keep instead any static service with features not currently > covered (or completely covered) by Olingo Server V4. > > Regards. -- Francesco Chicchiriccò Tirasa - Open Source Excellence http://www.tirasa.net/ Involved at The Apache Software Foundation: member, Syncope PMC chair, Cocoon PMC, Olingo PMC, CXF Committer, OpenJPA Committer, PonyMail PPMC http://home.apache.org/~ilgrosso/
