Not all things are that simple. Even the purists don't say that you 
have to execute all tests all the time ... at least the purists I 
know of.

What we are usually doing are smoke tests ... it doesn't blow up - 
it's fine ... and don't feel too upset now. As long as your are not 
using a coverage tool you just have a faint idea how much you are 
testing. And before you start dropping mail bombs on me go back to 
your dusty software engineering books and read about cyclomatic 
complexity and the number of test cases for simple statement 
coverage.

I run my smoke tests every time I build the JAR but some long running 
test are kept for prime time such as updating dependent JARs or a 
customer release. I'm not going to wait for a few minutes to dump uut 
a JAR with an additional getter .... and I DO get caught by the 
famous last words. 

I basically use TestSetup to structure my test and run the smoke test 
as a default. Having said that there is a maven target 

maven -Dtestcase=Foo test:single-test

which execute only the JUNIT test defined in "testcase"

Using TestSetups and test:single-test should cater for test quickie 
and long-running test at the same time. 


Siegfried Goeschl
CTO
=================================
IT20one GmbH
mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
phone: +43-1-9900046
fax: +43-1-52 37 888
www.it20one.at


On 22 Jan 2003 at 7:55, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

> Comments inline.
> 
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 22/01/2003 06:51:08 AM:
> 
> > I posted an email a while ago about that as well..  I would love to
> > be 
> able
> > to call maven java:jar -ignore test:test etc....  For the same
> > reasons 
> you
> > have specified.  Purists have said that you should ALWAYS run tests,
> > but when they slow you down too much, they are just ignored.  I
> > think being 
> able
> > to selectively turn them on and off would be great.
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Colin Sampaleanu [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> [snip]
> > Generally you do want to run tests when building a jar (or some
> > artifact 
> 
> > farther down the dependency chain). But it is also a pretty common
> > occurrence that you want to do that target without executing tests,
> > e.g. 
> 
> > when you have just changed a property file, etc., and you know it
> > will not affect tests. I realize that 'maven.test.failure.ignore' is
> > 
> 
> 'You know it will not affect test' - Famous last words IMHO.
> 
> > Does anybody agree or have comments?
> If you're going to build a jar, my take is it should be a functional
> one, otherwise what's the point? -- dIon Gillard, Multitask Consulting
> Blog:      http://www.freeroller.net/page/dion/Weblog Work:     
> http://www.multitask.com.au
> 
> 
> 
> 
> --
> 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]>

Reply via email to