Hi Martin, > I still have a lot of hesitations about whatever we should migrate to > TestNG or not... I had a look at the TestNG API and got the > (admittedly superficial) impression of an API slightly less structured > than the JUnit one. Keeping in mind that the choice could impact the > GeoAPI conformance module, staying with JUnit may increase the users > base since TestNG can execute JUnit tests, while the converse is not > true. It would also avoid disturbing geoapi-conformance users (I have > no idea if there is many). Furthermore JUnit is bundled in the Android > API (but only JUnit 3, not 4), which may be a platform to explore.
mavenized android projects do not have this problem, so no argument ;) > Any though? I definitely wouldn't go with additional dependencies! Because I doubt that 1. the development is active (or stays active as one wants it) -> what if they have a bug? 2. there are jars in some maven repository -> very important for easy development setup!! For tests I would go mainstream, so pure junit or pure testng. One approach would be using testng for some modules and testng for others like Chris suggested. So e.g. in SIS use testng only where it is really necessary. I for myself cannot live without unit tests but I'm comfortable with junit as well as testng. And at the end the most important point is not the test framework itself or its features it is the presence and simplicity/readability of tests :) ! Regards, Peter.
