Oh I agree completely - just an evaluation was all I was suggesting. No sense in make drastic changes without some solid data.
----- "Jesus M. Rodriguez" jmrodri@gmail.com wrote:
If you want Cucumber to replace the other things, I suggest getting it setup to run at least one of the test scenarios and show how it will fit in our process.
If it seems like a good fit we can decide then. I don't want to say let's do it without knowing how it will work, same for not wanting to just give up on it.
jesus
On Wed, Mar 10, 2010 at 9:09 AM, Justin Harris jharris@redhat.com wrote:
Personally, I would like to give Cucumber an evaluation to see if it
could fit in well with buildr plus our extreme agile development. :) I'm happy to let it fall by the wayside if folks are opposed to it, however.
- Justin
----- "Bryan Kearney" bkearney@redhat.com wrote:
What was the outcome of this? Do we have a plan to solidify /
modify /
or any other "fy" the various test bits?
-- bk
On 03/03/2010 10:24 AM, Devan Goodwin wrote:
The Java functional tests evolved first, they're kind of a
hybrid,
no
deployed Candlepin required, you have access to the database for
setup
purposes, but then (I think) they fire up a servlet container internally (Grizzy?) and test against that. Some benefits to this
but
this doesn't catch problems that sometimes surface in
Tomcat/JBoss.
Personally I'd prefer we port them to Python suite. (or something
else
should we replace that) I like testing this outside against a
full
environment as we can technically point it anywhere. It will
clutter
up the database (and thus should never be run against an
important
db)
and is a little harder to inject setup data (but this basically
just
boils down to uploading a cert right now), IMO we need that kind
of
external testing to have some degree of confidence that this
thing
is
working.
I'd vote we boil testing down to just Java unit tests, and Python
nosetests.
As for Cucumber it's blowing my mind and I don't yet see how it
even
works. :) Have to dig into it.
Can QA fit either solution (Cucumber/Python tests) into their
automated systems?
Cheers,
Devan
On Wed, Mar 3, 2010 at 11:02 AM, Justin
Harrisjharris@redhat.com
wrote:
I agree with this %100. In my view I would think that we have
two
kinds of tests:
Unit Tests - Junit Functional Tests - Cucumber? or python tests or whatever
Functional tests test the API via REST. Unit tests test small (class level) functionality
What am I missing? What is the purpose of the Java Functional
Tests?
- Justin
----- "Bryan Kearney"bkearney@redhat.com wrote:
I vote for a minimal number of testy things. RIght now I see:
Junit Java Functional Tests python scripts nosetests
if cucumber were to replace one of these.. great!
-- bk
On 03/03/2010 09:52 AM, Dmitri Dolguikh wrote: > On 03/03/2010 10:50 AM, Justin Harris wrote: >> I don't know if anyone has heard of Cucumber
its a BDD framework in ruby, but it seems like a nice way to
define
specific user stories that are directly executable. Has anyone
played
around with this? It could be a nice fit for candlepin... >> >> - Justin >> _______________________________________________ >> candlepin mailing list >> candlepin@lists.fedorahosted.org >> https://fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/candlepin >> > cucumber is HOT (admittedly i haven't played much with it). > -d > _______________________________________________ > candlepin mailing list > candlepin@lists.fedorahosted.org > https://fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/candlepin
candlepin mailing list candlepin@lists.fedorahosted.org https://fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/candlepin
candlepin mailing list candlepin@lists.fedorahosted.org https://fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/candlepin
candlepin mailing list candlepin@lists.fedorahosted.org https://fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/candlepin
candlepin mailing list candlepin@lists.fedorahosted.org https://fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/candlepin
candlepin mailing list candlepin@lists.fedorahosted.org https://fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/candlepin