RE: Junit Integration

[Kumar_maniranjan]

Hi,
Nothing else is required. It will run fine. What you can do is write a
simple script, either in ANT or in cmd or sh file which will set the
environment, compile all the classes and then run AllTests.java. It will
make it a one step process.  

Regards,
Maniranjan Kumar 


-Original Message-
From: Prabodh Goel [mailto:prabodhgoel@;yahoo.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, October 29, 2002 10:39 AM
To: Cactus Users List
Subject: Junit Integration



Hi

I need to integrate all the unit tests which
developers write in their own local machine using
JUnit.

By simply writing all the unit test classes inside AllTests.java is
enough or do I need to define some guidelines ?

regards,
Prabodh


__
Do you Yahoo!?
HotJobs - Search new jobs daily now
http://hotjobs.yahoo.com/

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:

For additional commands, e-mail:



--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   
For additional commands, e-mail: 

Junit Integration

[Prabodh Goel]

Hi

I need to integrate all the unit tests which
developers write in their own local machine using
JUnit.

By simply writing all the unit test classes inside
AllTests.java is enough or do I need to define some
guidelines ?

regards,
Prabodh


__
Do you Yahoo!?
HotJobs - Search new jobs daily now
http://hotjobs.yahoo.com/

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   
For additional commands, e-mail: 

RE: FormAuthentication

[Robertson, Jason]

I think this is a good solution. Separate WAR files is the only way I know
of to use different authentication techniques.

Plus, the side effect of making a clearer separation between the example and
the unit tests I agree is a good thing.

Do you want my test app? It's just a very simple web app with pages to do
the form authentication as well, so you have a 2nd avenue to test
configuration if you're having troubles with cactus. Its the one I used to
test Tomcat and WLS. I'm sure it can be easily adapted to any other J2EE
server. Let me know and I'll try to bundle it up.

Jason

-Original Message-
From: Vincent Massol [mailto:vmassol@;octo.com]
Sent: Saturday, October 26, 2002 2:12 PM
To: 'Cactus Users List'
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: FormAuthentication


Hi Jason/Pranab,

Thank you both for the good analysis! There are indeed 2 bugs you have
found:
- one with the FormAuthentication using only the default redirector
- one with the HttpClient fetching the test result using only the
default redirector

I have now fixed (hopefully) both bugs in CVS. You can check the CVS
commit emails if you wish to see what I have modified. I would be happy
to know if you agree with my changes... :-)

However, there is still something missing which I was not able to code:
it is a test for the FormAuthentication class. The problem is that
apparently you can only have one method of authentication in a given
webapp and ATM the sample webapp is using Basic authentication... Thus
we cannot easily add one more test for testing Jason's
FormaAuthentication code ... I was pondering about what route to take
for that. Any idea?

One solution would be to have several webapp of course and more
specifically to have the following directory structure in CVS:

jakarta-cactus
  |_ [...]
  |_ servlet-sample
  |_ servlet-unit

servlet-sample: contains only the org.apache.cactus.sample.* packages.
It is the sample application.

servlet-unit: contains only the org.apache.cactus.unit.* packages. The
goal of this application is to offer a full regression test suite for
Cactus. It is not a sample application per see. The idea would then be
to have a build file that produces 3 wars: one test.war (no
authentication tests), one test-basic.war (basic authentication tests)
and one test-form.war (form-based authentication tests). 

Note: Some persons have told me it was difficult to understand the
differences between the unit/ and sample/ directories in the
servlet-sample project. That would solve the problem.

What do you think?

Thanks
-Vincent

> -Original Message-
> From: Robertson, Jason [mailto:Jason.Robertson@;acs-inc.com]
> Sent: 26 October 2002 15:40
> To: 'Cactus Users List'
> Subject: RE: FormAuthentication
> 
> Time for Vincent to chime in!
> 
> Vincent, Pranab's comments below show that there's a problem in the
> reconfiguring of the Redirector in that you can configure it in two
> places:
> in WebRequest and in cactus.properties, but only the latter is
persistent
> between callRunTest and callGetResult. In callGetResult, a new
WebRequest
> is
> created and gets initialized with the cactus.properties value.
> 
> Should calling setRedirectorName in the WebRequest propagate that
setting
> to
> the configuration? Or should that method be removed from WebRequest
and
> added to the WebConfiguration interface and then you'd say:
> 
> aWebRequestObject.getConfiguration().setRedirectorName(...);
> 
> Or should the same WebRequest object be shared between callRunTest and
> callGetResult? I would think this would make the most sense, I don't
know
> if
> I like accessing static properties through a transient object.
> 
> If we take the reuse-the-WebRequest approach, the signature for
> callGetResult would change to remove the AbstractAuthen. Thetication
and add
> the
> WebRequest (the authentication object would already be configured in
the
> WebRequest) and you'd have to add something like a "setParameter" that
> would
> overwrite any existing parameter and allow you to reconfigure the
service
> name parameter.
> 
> None of these changes are that difficult, but does any one look better
or
> worse in the "big picture"?
> 
> Jason

[snip]



--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:

For additional commands, e-mail:


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   
For additional commands, e-mail: 

RE: FormAuthentication

[Dhar, Pranab]

Guys ,
   I got past the 404 error.It was a mistake on my part
by not mapping /ServletRedirectSecure to the ServletRedirectorSecure Alias
of the ServletRedirector Servlet.
   Thanks again for your help and understanding.

Pranab

-Original Message-
From: Dhar, Pranab [mailto:Pranab.Dhar@;DFA.STATE.NY.US]
Sent: Sunday, October 27, 2002 10:39 PM
To: 'Cactus Users List'
Subject: RE: FormAuthentication


Hi Jason/Vincent,
   I checked out the code changes and as expected the first call 
gets the JSESSIONID from the Server to proceed with calling the servlet
set by Webrequest.setURL() .The GET_RESULTS query now use the same
redirector.
   I am having a little glitch with the test as I am getting a 404 return
code
for a valid servlet.

...

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   
For additional commands, e-mail: 

config of struts with cactus

[Manoj, Mathew]

Hi
 Is the Cactus latest ver is compatible with Jakarta struts 1.0  ?

Mat
-Original Message-
From: Taylor,Timothy L. [mailto:ttaylor@;mitre.org]
Sent: Monday, October 28, 2002 1:57 PM
To: Cactus Users List
Subject: Re: Junit Vs Jtest


One thing to point out is that JTest can run JUnit tests, so you loose 
nothing by starting with JUnit (which is free), and then if you want to 
eventually move to JTest, the time invested in writing JUnit tests won't 
have been wasted.
- Tim

Larry Tambascio wrote:

> You should check out the archive for the JUnit mail list!! Back in 
> early September there was a great many messages about this very 
> topic.  I won't even attempt to summarize.
>
> Later,
> -Larry
>
> On Tue, 15 Oct 2002 22:01:08 -0700 (PDT)
>  Prabodh Goel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>
>> Hi Guys,
>>
>> Does anyone know which is better for unit testing
>> Jtest or Junit ? and Why ?
>>
>> regards,
>> Prabodh
>>
>>
>> __
>> Do you Yahoo!?
>> Faith Hill - Exclusive Performances, Videos & More
>> http://faith.yahoo.com
>>
>> -- 
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: 
>>  
>> For additional commands, e-mail: 
>> 
>>
>
>
> -- 
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:   
> 
> For additional commands, e-mail: 
> 
>



--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   
For additional commands, e-mail: 


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   
For additional commands, e-mail: 

Re: Junit Vs Jtest

[Taylor,Timothy L.]

One thing to point out is that JTest can run JUnit tests, so you loose 
nothing by starting with JUnit (which is free), and then if you want to 
eventually move to JTest, the time invested in writing JUnit tests won't 
have been wasted.
- Tim

Larry Tambascio wrote:

You should check out the archive for the JUnit mail list!! Back in 
early September there was a great many messages about this very 
topic.  I won't even attempt to summarize.

Later,
-Larry

On Tue, 15 Oct 2002 22:01:08 -0700 (PDT)
 Prabodh Goel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:


Hi Guys,

Does anyone know which is better for unit testing
Jtest or Junit ? and Why ?

regards,
Prabodh


__
Do you Yahoo!?
Faith Hill - Exclusive Performances, Videos & More
http://faith.yahoo.com

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: 
 
For additional commands, e-mail: 




--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   

For additional commands, e-mail: 





--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   
For additional commands, e-mail: 

Error instantiating class - the classes are definitely only in the war

[Aaron Robinson]

Getting an "Error instantiating class" error when trying to run a cactus 
test using with WebLogic 6.1

The test I have created is very simple, it has a single test method that is 
empty.

If this test case extends the cactus ServletTestCase class directly 
everything works okay.

I get the above error when introducing a class between the ServletTestCase 
and my test case...

-
|ServletTestCase|
-
  /\
   |
   |
|--|
|BaseCactusTestCase|
|--|
  /\
   |
   |
|--|
|MyTestCase|
|--|

I have read through previous posts and this error occurs when the test case 
can be found in more than oe place.

My ear contains a war and a number of utility jars. Only the war contains 
the BaseCactusTestCase and MyTestCase.

The war has the following structure...

web-inf
 weblogic.xml
 web.xml
 classes
   com
  foo
 bar
MyTestCase.class
 utility
stuff
   BaseCactusTestCase.class
meta-inf
 Manifest.mf

...and other log4j jars etc

Any help very much appreciated


_
Surf the Web without missing calls! Get MSN Broadband. 
http://resourcecenter.msn.com/access/plans/freeactivation.asp


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   
For additional commands, e-mail: