On Thu, 11 Jul 2002, Martin Cooper wrote:
> Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2002 08:58:30 -0700
> From: Martin Cooper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Reply-To: Struts Developers List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: 'Struts Developers List' <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: RE: Running Unit Tests Before Commits
>
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Craig R. McClanahan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Thursday, July 11, 2002 8:52 AM
> > To: Struts Developers List
> > Subject: Re: Running Unit Tests Before Commits
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Thu, 11 Jul 2002, Cedric Dumoulin wrote:
> >
> > > Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2002 12:36:50 +0200
> > > From: Cedric Dumoulin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > Reply-To: Struts Developers List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > To: Struts Developers List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > Subject: Re: Running Unit Tests Before Commits
> > >
> > > Sorry for the inconvenience.
> > > I install the test process and will run it before any
> > further commit.
> > > Do you recommend to do testing for any tomcat version (3
> > and 4), or is
> > > the latest one enough ?
> > >
> >
> > I do my tests on the latest released 4.0 and 4.1 versions
> > (4.0.4 and 4.1.7
> > at the moment). I'm not particularly concerned with 3.2,
> > because it is so
> > ancient.
>
> Shouldn't we be checking against 3.2 (or 3.3?) to make sure we're testing
> against a Servlets 2.2 container, as well as a Servlets 2.3 container? Or
> are the tests not going to hit those kinds of issues anyway? (I can't say
> I've looked at Cactus or the Cactus tests too closely at this point.)
>
All of the existing tests are pretty low level, and are unlikely to run
into anything that would depend on the container versions. However, as we
add end-to-end tests in the future that will likely change.
> --
> Martin Cooper
>
Craig
>
> >
> > Running "ant test.tomcat.all" will run the Cactus based tests
> > against both
> > if you've defined "tomcat.home.40" and "tomcat.home.41" properties.
> >
> > > Cedric
> > >
> >
> > Craig
> >
> >
> > > Craig R. McClanahan wrote:
> > >
> > > >Doing the fix for 7751, I ran into a case where the undo
> > of the "/" adding
> > > >change caused the unit tests to fail, because I'd added
> > some tests for the
> > > >new behavior. I've commented those tests out until we
> > figure out what to
> > > >do about that particular situation.
> > > >
> > > >I'd like to ask all Struts committers to follow these practices:
> > > >
> > > >* When fixing a bug, build a unit test to verify the
> > corrected behavior
> > > > if this is at all reasonable to do. There are some mock
> > objects in
> > > > the src/test hierarchy now, so you should be able to
> > write JUnit tests
> > > > for pretty much any class other than the tag implementations.
> > > >
> > > >* Always run "ant test.junit" and "ant test.tomcat.all"
> > before checking
> > > > in your changes, to ensure that we don't introduce any
> > regressions on
> > > > stuff that is already tested.
> > > >
> > > >Thanks!
> > > >
> > > >Craig
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >--
> > > >To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> > <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > >For additional commands, e-mail:
> > <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> > <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > For additional commands, e-mail:
> > <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> > <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > For additional commands, e-mail:
> > <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
