[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       ant-dev
Subject:    Re: Ant 2 design (was Re: NIO 2.0 == Ant 2.0?)
From:       Bruce Atherton <bruce () callenish ! com>
Date:       2012-02-21 19:10:22
Message-ID: 4F43EC1E.3060405 () callenish ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

Unit testing has long been considered important for Ant. A published 
report a few years ago (can't find it now) showed our code coverage was 
among the highest of the open source projects that they reported on, as 
I recall. It has often happened that committers push back on code 
submissions asking that unit tests be included.

Other types of tests are welcome too, though. Integration tests such as 
you suggest for plugins, functional tests across classes. My own 
preference in development generally is to create a regression test for 
each bug report before fixing it to make sure it doesn't come back to 
bite us. But of course all of that is up to the people who make code 
submissions. The overhead of maintaining a large testing suite in open 
source projects tends to limit them to unit tests + some other tests for 
expected pain points.

> How easy is't to unit test additional plugins. When you rely a lot on
> context, you need to create a similar context for testing.
> Is't going to be easy ? Writing and testing tasks independently will
> allow a lot of plugins to exist.
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@ant.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@ant.apache.org

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]