> -----Original Message----- > From: Henri Yandell [mailto:bayard@;generationjava.com] > Sent: 20 October 2002 20:36 > To: Jakarta General List > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: Is Cactus successful (was RE: [PROPOSAL] Tapestry joins > Jakarta) > > > > On Sun, 20 Oct 2002, Vincent Massol wrote: > > > > > > > Ok I want to be positive and try to see if there's anything I can do to > > improve the overall Cactus community. You say Cactus might be missing > > some marketing muscles. I would like to believe that. From the > > information in my email do you still think there's more the Cactus team > > could do? > > Even ignoring my Jakarta-Apache involvement, I had become aware of Cactus > through articles [i think] and mention in the media. However, there's no > real meme [I think is the phrase] for Cactus. I know that Cactus is Java, > I know it tests web pages somehow (least it's hooked up in there) but I > don't have a good idea as to why I would choose it, how it differs from > httpunit etc. [A quick look at the website shows that my initial > assumption was off a touch, it tests Java server-side components].
Hehe ... I think you may have nailed the exact problem! Even your last sentence is not completely correct which proves your point (although it is written on the web site!)... ;-) It's about *unit* testing java server-side components (although at the moment it is more restricted to unit testing J2EE components but that's not the only goal). And it's about doing it in-container (inside the container). Would "In-container Unit Testing" or "Integration Unit Testing" be a nice meme? I think the problem also comes from the fact that unit tests are still relatively new. And what Cactus is doing is even newer. Thus there is not yet any global knowledge of what IUT is about ... Cactus was built to explore this road and is indeed a precursor ;-) > > So for me personally, and I suspect other people who are aware of Cactus, > there's not a real understanding first off of where it fits in, the level > of effort to use etc. > Yes, you are right. Everything is described on the web site (included comparisons with other strategies), etc. BUT the problem is that you have to read it first ... In that sense, Andrew was right. There is a need to do a lot of evangelization on the concept of IUT so that it enters our global mind. > [adding it to article list to write at some point, though I'm sure there > are many out there. ] That would be nice ;-) > > Probably not much use, but a report from a prospective customer can > sometimes be of interest. I'd say Cactus is marketing the brand okay, but > not the meme. Not that I really understand brands or memes :) I think you are completely right :-) In addition the concept may need to be expanded a bit as it may be too restrictive. Here are some ideas for the future: - runtime unit testing (possibly using AOP) - stress unit testing (Thus more like tools like Introscope but at a much more agile level.) It would still be In-Container Unit Testing (ICUT or IUT), though... > > Hen > -Vincent -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:general-unsubscribe@;jakarta.apache.org> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:general-help@;jakarta.apache.org>
