Re: [Wpg-proxy-development] design details and impact on unittesting

[John S. <jo...@we...>]

Juan,

Considering we are starting from scratch I see nothing wrong with =
upgrading
our junit version, however isn=92t their already a =93test=94 build.xml =
target?
Can=92t we just use that?

Thanks, John

=20

=20


  _____ =20

From: wpg...@li...
[mailto:wpg...@li...] On Behalf =
Of
Juan Gonz=E1lez
Sent: Monday, January 29, 2007 2:26 PM
To: wpg...@li...
Subject: Re: [Wpg-proxy-development] design details and impact on
unittesting

=20

Hi back,
   I've found a little time to work on the testing issue, and would like =
to
know  what do you think about using jUnit 4.1 instead of 3.8. In 4.1, a =
new
annotation based system has been included which makes tests far more =
elegant
( http://www.devx.com/Java/Article/31983/0/page/1 has a comprehensive
guide). The 4.1 junit only has one problem, it's integration with ant, =
but
as explained in the previous guide that's a small barrier as there is a
JUnit4TestAdapter class included for convenience. If you agree with =
using
4.1 is just a matter of changing the ivy.xml...

Besides this, i've uploaded an updated version of the build.xml file =
that
includes a target to compile&run the (to be done) tests found on
${wpg.proxy.test}, and a target to run the sample Proxy class, let me =
know
what do you think of it.=20

Back to work