On Fri, Oct 2, 2009 at 16:20, Dave Stanley <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi Chris,
> I think it makes a lot of sense. I would also be interested to see if we
> could also
>
> 1) Test features install cleanly

I've recently added some camel integration tests to do exactly that.
  https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/camel/trunk/tests/camel-itest-karaf/
The tests are disabled for now because there are still a couple of
things to work out, but the basics are here.

> 2) Test the distribution samples using the same approach.
>
> /Dave
>
> On Mon, Sep 28, 2009 at 3:36 PM, Chris Custine <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Jean-Baptiste suggested in another thread that we consider moving to SMX4
>> for component testing, and this has also crossed my mind recently so we
>> thought it bet to start a specific thread to discuss this.
>>
>> I think it will certainly be a requirement to automate testing of
>> components
>> inside SMX4, but there are also some more immediate motivations for doing
>> this in order to test components with updated dependencies used in SMX4.
>> After using Pax Exam a bit lately with the SMX4 itests, I am wondering if
>> that would be a suitable mechanism to test components with SMX4?  I think
>> this would certainly be a more accurate test of integration with the
>> runtime
>> than the current tests, although there will possibly be a performance
>> penalty when running tests due to the more heavyweight nature.
>> Alternatively, we could bootstrap some smaller chunk of SMX4 in order to
>> perform more isolated tests without starting a full container.
>>
>> I am currently leaning towards using Pax Exam because it would provide a
>> very accurate representation of the component running inside the container.
>> This would include deployment and startup lifecycle, interaction with
>> runtime dependencies, etc. which is slightly more accurate than the current
>> tests.
>>
>> One final question is whether SMX4 provides an adequate test environment
>> that is reciprocal with SMX3.  We have been relying on SMX3 for testing
>> components that are also deployed in SMX4, so is this also good enough the
>> other way around or do we need to keep both?  One of the downsides of the
>> current tests is that many of the components have their own base tests that
>> create the appropriate environment in which to test, and I think this has
>> made the tests harder to maintain.  I think one of the goals for this would
>> be to make test authoring much easier.
>>
>> So what are everyone's thoughts on this?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Chris
>> --
>> Chris Custine
>> FUSESource :: http://fusesource.com
>> My Blog :: http://blog.organicelement.com
>> Apache ServiceMix :: http://servicemix.apache.org
>> Apache Directory Server :: http://directory.apache.org
>>
>



-- 
Cheers,
Guillaume Nodet
------------------------
Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/
------------------------
Open Source SOA
http://fusesource.com

Reply via email to