2012/6/25 Andre Fischer <a...@a-w-f.de>: > On 25.06.2012 10:00, Zhe Liu wrote: >> >> 2012/6/25 Andre Fischer <a...@a-w-f.de>: >>> >>> Hi Zhe Liu, >>> >>> we already have four test related modules under main/ (test, >>> testautomation, >>> testgraphical, testtools). >>> >>> Would one of these be a good place to add two sub-directories for the new >>> testing code? >> >> Are you concerned about too many modules? > > > Yes. > > >> >> The new 2 modules are top level modules. qadevoo and testoo depend >> on testcommon. >> qadevoo->testcommon >> testoo -> testcommon >> If >> qadevoo->test/testcommon >> test/testoo ->test/testcommon >> I don't know if it works according to the current build system. In >> addition, I don't want to overwrite the existing code. They are >> totally different. The 4 modules is maintained by nobody and can be >> removed in future, I said it in >> http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Test_Refactor > > > I see. The goal is to remove the modules test, testautomation, > testgraphical, testtools? Then it is OK to ignore them for now. > > But then my question is: why not one new module and place testcommon and > testoo as subdirectories into it? Do you mean the code structure like the following? test/testcommon test/testoo Jürgen suggested the same code layout. Actually I also prefer to it. I have one question. test/testoo depends on "test/testcommon". cd test/testoo build Is testcommon built automatically? If yes, it's ok.
> > Besides, has the naming scheme (test{common/oo}) anything to do with the now > obsolete distinction between oo and so (the Sun only code parts)? No! Do you have better name? > > -Andre -- Best Regards >From aliu...@gmail.com