----- Original Message -----
From: "Alex Fernández" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, May 23, 2001 10:58 AM
Subject: Re: Test classification
> Hi Thomas!
>
> Thomas Calivera wrote:
> > "I sent along some classes, supposed to be mock objects for the served
> > 2.2 API. I'm resending them, now with the correct package and license,
> > to be inserted in org.apache.commons.cactus.mock. "
> >
> > I took a very brief glance at your mock objects and they look like they
are
> > right on the money for a need of mine to test a servlet in a simple
fashion.
> > Making these available to the community seems wise since a lot of people
> > doing unit testing on servlets in this fashion usually end up writing
these
> > same mock objects (I was about to). I shall let you know how the
experience
> > goes once I plug them into a servlet or two.
>
> Go ahead! I hope they're useful.
>
> The usual collaborative-development benefits apply: we did not implement
> all of the methods in the HttpServletRequest and HttpServletResponse,
> some of them were not needed (like getRequestedSessionId()). So, if you
> complement the classes and share them, we will all benefit :)
>
> > As for the role of Cactus in general, I'd like to write tests for a
> > particular servlet in such a way that I can test using *either* mock
objects
> > or in container without recompiling or changing any code in the test
> > classes. This allows a first round of pure J2EE testing, then
progressive
> > rounds testing different containers as necessary. In larger teams with
the
> > proper scripts, this process allows a daily "container test." Developers
> > test against the mock objects on the development machines and a
> > comprehensive project test, including containers, occurs over night or
> > during lunch.
>
> That's a cool scheme. Are you working in a big project? Will you
> implement that scheme?
>
Yes, please do come help us to implement that on Cactus ! :)
> Un saludo,
>
> Alex.
Thanks
Vincent.
