Re: [Springframework-developer] Testing Controllers and FormControllers

[<jue...@we...>]

While I object to keeping our new mocks in the "test" tree, I'm not =
against keeping them in the "src" tree, excluding them from spring.jar =
and Clover coverage. Rod was quite keen on having the separate "mock" =
tree, so I guess we need to wait for his opinion, taking into account =
the Maven issue. Unfortunately, he won't be online before Tuesday =
morning...
=20
In any case, it's important to agree on this before 1.0.2, which is =
currently scheduled for release in two weeks.
=20
Juergen
=20

________________________________

Von: spr...@li... im Auftrag =
von Luke Taylor
Gesendet: Fr 30.04.2004 21:44
An: spr...@li...
Betreff: Re: [Springframework-developer] Testing Controllers and =
FormControllers



My main concern isn't so much whether they are in the test or src tree,
it's just that the overall structure seems a bit haphazard. And I don't
see why they should be split from the core when other modules aren't.

If separate modules are going to be split from the codebase then it
would make sense to follow a standard pattern, e.g.

core
  |
   - src
  |
   - test

mock
  |
   - src

other
  |
   - src
  |
   - test

Ok, Ok... so my main concern is that it won't work with my Maven build
unless I hack it :) and until then my reports are stuck at Apr 28th. But
I agree with the aims Maven had of establishing a common structure for
project layouts, even though you could easily argue that they aren't
exactly a shining example of best practice development themselves.

Luke.

j=FCrgen h=F6ller [werk3AT] wrote:
> IMO, there's a strong difference between the "mock" and the "test"
> tree: The latter is a rough test suite for the framework itself,
> while the former contains polished mock classes that are also useful
> for applications, thus get distributed as "spring-mock.jar". The
> mocks would even fit better in "src" than in "test" in that respect.
>
> Actually, the "mock" tree is more similar to the main "src" tree than
> the "test" tree in a number of respects: It's meant to be used by
> applications, shipped as jar , included in the javadoc, and requires
> higher coding standards than the framework test suite. I'm quite
> strongly against keeping that sort of classes in the "test" tree.
>
> Juergen
>
>



--
  Luke Taylor.                      Monkey Machine Ltd.
  PGP Key ID: 0x57E9523C            http://www.monkeymachine.ltd.uk




-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by: Oracle 10g
Get certified on the hottest thing ever to hit the market... Oracle 10g.
Take an Oracle 10g class now, and we'll give you the exam FREE.
http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=3D3149&alloc_id=3D8166&op=3Dclick
_______________________________________________
Springframework-developer mailing list
Spr...@li...
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/springframework-developer