Yeah, my idea is that I'll be lowering the build time quite a bit. :)
On Fri, Oct 4, 2013 at 3:44 PM, Christian Müller
wrote:
> Cool.
> We have to have an eye on the build time, because we add new components and
> tests in each release which is increasing it...
>
> Best,
>
> Christian
>
Cool.
We have to have an eye on the build time, because we add new components and
tests in each release which is increasing it...
Best,
Christian
-
Software Integration Specialist
Apache Camel committer: https://camel.apache.org/team
V.P. Apache Camel: https://www.apache.org/fou
Agreed, Christian. There are more references to Mockito in the
codebase than there are EasyMock. Given that trend, I'm thinking I'll
write up a patch with Mockito.
On Fri, Oct 4, 2013 at 3:03 PM, Christian Müller
wrote:
> Hy guys, I'm a bit late...
>
> I'm also fine with both, Mockito and EasyMo
Hy guys, I'm a bit late...
I'm also fine with both, Mockito and EasyMock, but would also prefer if we
only use one of both in intermediate-term. I think it's easier to maintain
only one over the time...
Best,
Christian
-
Software Integration Specialist
Apache Camel committer: h
Thanks to you !
I will take a look to "replace" Easymock by Mockito in other tests.
Regards
JB
On 10/04/2013 03:52 PM, James Carman wrote:
JIRA created:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CAMEL-6826
I'll work on a patch this evening and attach it. Thanks for the input, JB!
On Fri, Oct
JIRA created:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CAMEL-6826
I'll work on a patch this evening and attach it. Thanks for the input, JB!
On Fri, Oct 4, 2013 at 9:47 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:
> Fair enough, yes.
>
> Regards
> JB
>
>
> On 10/04/2013 03:44 PM, James Carman wrote:
>>
>> By
Fair enough, yes.
Regards
JB
On 10/04/2013 03:44 PM, James Carman wrote:
By the way, I just did a quick search and mockito is found all over
the place in the codebase, so I would guess it's okay.
On Fri, Oct 4, 2013 at 9:41 AM, James Carman wrote:
I agree that we should try to standardize,
By the way, I just did a quick search and mockito is found all over
the place in the codebase, so I would guess it's okay.
On Fri, Oct 4, 2013 at 9:41 AM, James Carman wrote:
> I agree that we should try to standardize, but it is only a
> test-scoped dependency, so it's not like you'll put a bur
I agree that we should try to standardize, but it is only a
test-scoped dependency, so it's not like you'll put a burden on user
code. Do we really think that in order for one component to use
Mockito that we have to change everyone else? If it's not that
pervasive, it's not a big deal, but could
No problem for me, but I would avoid to use both Mockito and Easymock.
Currently, Camel uses Easymock. If you plan to use Mockito, it makes
sense to update the other tests that use Easymock to use Mockito.
Regards
JB
On 10/04/2013 03:26 PM, James Carman wrote:
JB,
I have used EasyMock in the
JB,
I have used EasyMock in the past and that's fine if that's what this
project has standardized upon, but I must suggest we take a look at
Mockito. I was recently turned on to Mockito and it really puts the
"easy" in EasyMock (something they neglected to do I guess :).
James
On Fri, Oct 4, 20
Hi James,
it sounds good to me. I would advice Easymock.
Regards
JB
On 10/04/2013 03:06 PM, James Carman wrote:
As opposed to using a real HazelcastInstance, I would like to change
the tests to use mock objects (using Mockito or something). There is
no real reason to use a live, running Hazel
12 matches
Mail list logo
