I would certainly prefer to continue with junit. There are frameworks such as cactus, that allow junit tests to be run in J2EE environments, and if vendors need the ability to run the tests in some other environment that is not supported by junit or cactus then they always have the option of developing their own test runners or tweaking the junit code to fit their requirements. This does seem like an edge case and it would seem appropriate for those users to invest the effort to solve the problem rather than putting an extra burden on developing the general purpose CTS.
Thanks, Andy. -----Original Message----- From: kelvin goodson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 20 April 2007 17:19 To: tuscany-dev@ws.apache.org Subject: Re: [Java SDO CTS] Junit 4.1 pattern for calling setUp when classes don't inherit from TestCase The Junit tooling is so useful I'd be loath to drop it as the harness that the Tuscany implementation uses for exercising the tests. I'm going to do a bit of playing to see what solutions are practical, but I'm concerned that we may be considering putting significant effort into a goal that's rather too theoretical, as junit seems so ubiquitous. Regards, Kelvin. On 20/04/07, Andy Grove < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: <snip/> One option is to stop using junit completely and replicate the useful > features in a minimal test framework that supports parameterized tests > e.g. we could introduce a CTSTestCase interface: > > > <snip/> --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
