[
Date Prev][
Date Next][
Thread Prev][
Thread Next][
Date Index][
Thread Index]
[
List Home]
|
RE: [eclipselink-dev] EclipseLink dependencies
|
Mike,
Peter is right. The first issue is the version of JUnit we are going to use across the project. I would like to see it be consistent (avoid multiple versions) and inline with any testing infrastructure we need on the Eclipse servers.
Additional questions:
With the DBWS functionality and tests not part of the initial contribution can you verify that this ANT extension is required by the test cases in the initial contribution?
What does this extension do? If we have testing infrastructure it should be used beyond the scope of a single developer and should be adaptable by other functional areas trying to solve similar issues. I would not want to see each functional area come up with its own testing silos and thus introduce a barrier to understanding and joining our project as a contributor or committer.
If in the end we do require this functionality and it aligns with our JUnit usage we should start capturing information about its existence and usage on the project's wiki.
Note: We plan to start discussing our wiki structure so that we can attempt to better organize at least our initial wiki usage.
Doug
-----Original Message-----
From: eclipselink-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:eclipselink-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of Peter Krogh
Sent: Thursday, July 19, 2007 1:38 PM
To: Dev mailing list for Eclipse Persistence Services;
michael.norman@xxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [eclipselink-dev] EclipseLink dependencies
Yes. I would think so.
My question is are we using Junit4? Does Orbit have it?
-----Original Message-----
From: eclipselink-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:eclipselink-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of Tom Ware
Sent: Thursday, July 19, 2007 1:31 PM
To: michael.norman@xxxxxxxxxx; Dev mailing list for Eclipse Persistence
Services
Subject: Re: [eclipselink-dev] EclipseLink dependencies
Are we allowed to append this to the initial contribution bug?
Mike Norman wrote:
> Doug Clarke wrote:
>
>> I would consider this code to be part of the EclipseLink testing
>> source that should have been contributed in our initial contribution.
>>
>> How much code is it?
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> *From:* eclipselink-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
>> [mailto:eclipselink-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx]*On Behalf Of *Mike
>> Norman
>> *Sent:* Thursday, July 19, 2007 10:20 AM
>> *To:* Dev mailing list for Eclipse Persistence Services
>> *Subject:* Re: [eclipselink-dev] EclipseLink dependancies
>>
>> Tom Ware wrote:
>>
>>>Are we filling requests for the testing-only jars?assume we do not need to do this for JUnit.
>>>
>> I have a custom extension to JUnit4 (junit4-ext-pb4.jar - .java
>> and .class files); do we
>> need to do any IP work for it?
>>
> Only the core tests (and its underlying framework) was added. DBWS
> uses JUnit4 with an extension to manage ADE .properties
> files (titl.properties, env.properties - actually, it works outside of
> ADE and the .properties files could be call anything.properties)
>
> 15 Java source files, 1 antlib.xml file => compiles to 22 .class files
>
> --
> Oracle Email Signature Logo
> Mike Norman | Principal Software Designer | 613.288.4638
> Oracle Server Technologies | TopLink Product
> 45 O'Connor Street, Suite 400 | Ottawa, ON K1P 1A4 | (fax) 613.238.2818
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>_______________________________________________
>eclipselink-dev mailing list
>eclipselink-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
>https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/eclipselink-dev
>
>
_______________________________________________
eclipselink-dev mailing list
eclipselink-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/eclipselink-dev
_______________________________________________
eclipselink-dev mailing list
eclipselink-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/eclipselink-dev
