qpid-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Rupert Smith" <rupertlssm...@googlemail.com>
Subject Re: Draft Interop Testing Spec - Please Read
Date Tue, 06 Mar 2007 17:10:08 GMT
Test clients are just going to send a pass/fail to the coordinator. In
the failure case they can put whatever text they like in the message
body, by way of explanation (log, stack trace, whatever). Coordinator
will take care of outputing the results to XML.

On 3/6/07, Alan Conway <aconway@redhat.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 2007-03-05 at 10:21 +0000, Rupert Smith wrote:
> > As for gathering reports, I was thinking that each test (sender part)
> > would report pass/fail (message body containing reason for failure in
> > failure cases) to the coordinator, of which there is only one, and it
> > will write out the xml reports. Reason for that being that the code to
> > write the reports only needs to be written/maintained in one place.
> Well everybody needs to write their own XML fragments, the coordinator
> is just gluing them together into a report. Not hard though JUnit &
> CppUnit both have XML outputters already. I do see the advantages of
> having a central point collate all the results. Ideally the tests should
> be plain JUnit/CppUnit and all the extra wiring to send results should
> be in special test runners.
> > Was also thinking of adding the requirement that each test client talk
> > to the coordinator over a seperate AMQ connection to that which is
> > sends its test messages over. The idea being, that if a test failure
> > causes closure of the connection, it should still manage to send its
> > report. A more serious melt-down that causes the test client to
> > completely fail, should still result in the test report being written
> > out as a fail, because the coordinator knows which tests/clients it
> > started -> which ones did not produce a report -> which ones to write
> > out a failure for. So no covered tracks. In this case, look in the log
> > for the dead test client to figure out what happened. Does this sound
> > ok?
> Yup, give it a go. If necessary we can have tests also log to a local
> file or console as a back-up in the event of a crash preventing the
> result message from being sent.
> > Producing updated working interop spec, with a view to putting it on
> > the wiki later today.
> Looking forward to it!

View raw message