From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 28450 invoked by alias); 20 Mar 2006 10:53:46 -0000 Received: (qmail 28424 invoked from network); 20 Mar 2006 10:53:42 -0000 Received: from unknown (139.165.32.99) by sourceware.org with QMTP; 20 Mar 2006 10:53:42 -0000 Received: (qmail 27165 invoked by uid 510); 20 Mar 2006 11:51:36 +0100 Received: from 139.165.77.198 by serv54.segi.ulg.ac.be (envelope-from , uid 501) with qmail-scanner-1.25 (clamdscan: 0.87.1/1342. spamassassin: 3.0.2. Clear:RC:1(139.165.77.198):. Processed in 0.035661 secs); 20 Mar 2006 10:51:36 -0000 Received: from vbstefi118.fapse.ulg.ac.be (HELO [139.165.77.198]) ([139.165.77.198]) (envelope-sender ) by serv54.segi.ulg.ac.be (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP for ; 20 Mar 2006 11:51:36 +0100 Message-ID: <441E8937.4030205@gnu.org> Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2006 10:53:00 -0000 From: Arnaud Vandyck User-Agent: Debian Thunderbird 1.0.2 (X11/20051010) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: classpath@gnu.org CC: mauve-discuss@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: Mauve wishlist References: <1142613140.3805.20.camel@rh-ibm-t41> In-Reply-To: <1142613140.3805.20.camel@rh-ibm-t41> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mailing-List: contact mauve-discuss-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: mauve-discuss-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2006-q1/txt/msg00066.txt.bz2 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Thomas Fitzsimmons wrote: > Hi, [...] > There is also lots of room for improvement in how Mauve tests are > selected and run. I'm hoping someone who better understands Mauve's > design will elaborate. I had a very quick look at TestNG[0] and I think it could be a good approach: no need to change the mauve test classes, just invoke the tests with TestNG. There is an eclipse plugin that display the running tests like JUnit. TestNG use a tag feature like we have in mauve (JDK1.1, JDK1.2, ...) and we can add other groups like swing, nio, etc. Those tags can be annotations or javadoc comments (with @ and I think it's processed with xdoclet). As I understood (but I did not read all the documentation), the very big advantage Mauve can take in adopting TestNG (vs JUnit?) is that we shouldn't have to re-write all the test cases! [0] http://testng.org/doc/ - -- Arnaud Vandyck ,= ,-_-. =. ((_/)o o(\_)) `-'(. .)`-' \_/ Java Trap: http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/java-trap.html -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFEHok24vzFZu62tMIRAmOoAJ9VI7oH+83wQ+FPJhvQjDfPNK+KFACbB5DS w3SFrZtDNCcjPNGEzJlDQLE= =7YEE -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----