Nothing was ever done, the rollbacks currently occur per test-suite as always.
Regards
Scott
On 10/11/2012, at 9:12 PM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:
> Sorry to resurrect this old post, but what is the status on this?
>
> Thanks
>
> Jacques
>
> From: "Scott Gray"
>> We've had this discussion before
Sorry to resurrect this old post, but what is the status on this?
Thanks
Jacques
From: "Scott Gray"
> We've had this discussion before, here is last one I could find:
> http://markmail.org/message/ftvs45vnzlobo7hb
>
> The solution I would like to propose for the problem David described
> is
Scott Gray wrote:
I'd really rather not have this idea die with a single response, I've
done my best to describe the perceived benefits and it would be good
to get some additional feedback from anyone who is interested.
Thanks
Scott
+ 1
I will not need to write separate test-suit only for r
"
> To: dev@ofbiz.apache.org
> Sent: Thursday, December 24, 2009 3:14:26 AM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern
> Subject: Re: Delegator rollback per test case?
>
> I'd really rather not have this idea die with a single response, I've
> done my best to describe the perc
Message -
From: "Scott Gray"
To: dev@ofbiz.apache.org
Sent: Thursday, December 24, 2009 3:14:26 AM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern
Subject: Re: Delegator rollback per test case?
I'd really rather not have this idea die with a single response, I've
done my best to describe th
On 24/12/2009, at 9:50 PM, Adam Heath wrote:
Scott Gray wrote:
I'd really rather not have this idea die with a single response, I've
done my best to describe the perceived benefits and it would be
good to
get some additional feedback from anyone who is interested.
I don't care either way,
Scott Gray wrote:
> I'd really rather not have this idea die with a single response, I've
> done my best to describe the perceived benefits and it would be good to
> get some additional feedback from anyone who is interested.
I don't care either way, however, I do have some suggestions on
implemen
I'd really rather not have this idea die with a single response, I've
done my best to describe the perceived benefits and it would be good
to get some additional feedback from anyone who is interested.
Thanks
Scott
On 13/12/2009, at 8:20 PM, Scott Gray wrote:
My intention was generally to h
My intention was generally to have one test suite per sub-package e.g.
one for org.ofbiz.accounting.finaccount, one for
org.ofbiz.accounting.fixedasset, etc.
Lets say I want to run 50 different order processing tests,
cancellations, edits, authorizations, packing, etc. To do this I have
My preference would still be to have one roll-back per test-suite, which
basically means one transaction per XML file. If you want the tests to use the
same data then put them in the same file. If you want them to use different
data, then they go in their own files.
I'm unclear about something
We've had this discussion before, here is last one I could find:
http://markmail.org/message/ftvs45vnzlobo7hb
The solution I would like to propose for the problem David described
is for us to make more use of the test-group child element of test-
suite and have tests within those groups rollb
11 matches
Mail list logo
