qpid-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Phil Harvey <p...@philharveyonline.com>
Subject Re: JUnit 4 upgrade
Date Fri, 02 Nov 2012 11:08:33 GMT
Sure.  I've attached it to QPID-3025.  It's a work in progress but
everything compiles and (I think) all the tests pass.

I was planning to refactor QpidTestCase to be more JUnit4-ish before
creating the final patch, but haven't yet decided what is the best way to
do that.


On 2 November 2012 09:39, Rob Godfrey <rob.j.godfrey@gmail.com> wrote:

> Sounds good to me...
>
> Do you have a patch for this that can be reviewed right now (obviously we
> want to hold off applying it until after the 0.20 branch is created).
>
> -- Rob
>
> On 2 November 2012 10:29, Phil Harvey <phil@philharveyonline.com> wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > I would like us to upgrade Qpid's Java test to use JUnit 4 rather than
> > Junit 3.  I believe this idea was floated a long time ago but never
> > progressed.
> >
> > My motivations are:
> >
> > - It opens the door to us replacing our bespoke test exclusion framework
> > with JUnit 4's Categories.  This would allow each test to state which
> > category it's in (eg SlowTest or Amqp010Only), so that you can run the
> full
> > test suite specifying which Category(s) to include or exclude.  Note that
> > it's hard to INclude a set of tests using our existing framework.
> >
> > - JUnit 4 bundles Hamcrest, which allows you to make more succinct and
> > readable assertions.
> >
> > - More succinct way of asserting that a specific exception was thrown
> > (@Test(expected=FooException.class)
> >
> > - assertEquals now supports arrays
> >
> > I have tried to do the upgrade and managed to get everything working.
>  Note
> > that this requires a change to almost all of our test classes because the
> > JUnit 4 way of specifying a test is to use @Test rather than extending
> > TestCase.
> >
> > I propose that we do this upgrade in Qpid v0.22.  Initially we would
> leave
> > our test exclusion framework as-is, migrating to use JUnit 4 Categories
> in
> > a separate piece of work.
> >
> > Would there be any objections to this?
> >
> > Phil
> >
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message