On Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 12:34 PM, Dhananjay Nene <dhananjay.n...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 12:25 PM, Gopalakrishnan Subramani > <gopalakrishnan.subram...@gmail.com> wrote: >> So you basically look for SMTP and also a POP3 access to the server? With >> that you could send a mail using SMTP and retrieve using POP3 to make sure >> the mail reached safely? There is no way to get the return receipt in SMTP >> (sorry, I could be wrong since I coded SMTP & POP3 6 years back with limited >> support). > > Only SMTP with programmatic access to query received emails is good enough. >> >> I used jmailsrv which is simple to configure and test on your scenarios. >> >> If you could share your testing strategy to test email, it would lead to >> good discussion. >> > > There is an released artifact "X". X needs to be tested for acceptance > criteria. No code changes can be introduced into X. X sends out > emails. Test cases need to test whether the mails got sent out > correctly. Thus after running test sequences, the mails that have gone > out need to be verified. The intent is to embed the mail server into > the test case (not X). Thus outgoing emails from X will get dispatched > to and received by the embedded mail server. Since test cases (but not > X) have programmatic access to X and its datastore, using whatever is > the available mail server api to query the mails it has received is > acceptable mechanism of verification. Using a embedded python mail > server helps the test cases to just test the received emails using > python calls rather than having to do POP3 calls instead. > s/programmatic access to X and its datastore/programmatic access to mail server and its datastore/g > Dhananjay > >> >> On Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 12:42 AM, Dhananjay Nene >> <dhananjay.n...@gmail.com>wrote: >> >>> On Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 12:03 PM, Gopalakrishnan Subramani >>> <gopalakrishnan.subram...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> > Use the http://hg.python.org/cpython/file/2.7/Lib/smtpd.py server. smtpd >>> is >>> > a proxy so only look at the client interface level, you may not need to >>> push >>> > to local server, no need to store to DB etc. >>> > >>> > you copy the file and modify and wrap to meet your automation needs and >>> to >>> > get the response confirmation once the mail delivered. >>> > >>> > SMTP RFC is very simple to code even in C++ & Java. But until or unless >>> you >>> > have mail client or mail proxy or a email server as your core >>> > business/module or automating the application functional testing, you >>> don't >>> > need to worry about testing with real mail server. >>> > >>> > Since you have mentioned as automated test, I assume that you don't mean >>> > unit testing. >>> >>> It is automated acceptance testing .. so testing is strictly at the >>> system boundaries. So it has to test the released version of the >>> artifact - without *any* changes. I presume that would constrain me >>> from introducing a different smtpd.py >>> >>> > Gopal >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > On Tue, Aug 23, 2011 at 11:39 PM, Dhananjay Nene >>> > <dhananjay.n...@gmail.com>wrote: >>> > >>> >> On Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 11:06 AM, Anand Chitipothu < >>> anandol...@gmail.com> >>> >> wrote: >>> >> > 2011/8/24 Dhananjay Nene <dhananjay.n...@gmail.com>: >>> >> >> What would be good options to embed a python mail server ? >>> >> >> >>> >> >> The scope is strictly restricted to automated testing. So the >>> embedded >>> >> >> mail server (embedded in the test cases) acts as the server which >>> >> >> receives email and is in turn further queried to ensure receipt of >>> >> >> email correctly. >>> >> >> >>> >> >> One option is http://lamsonproject.org/ >>> >> >> >>> >> >> Are there any other options you might suggest? >>> >> > >>> >> > Do you really want to run a mail server for testing? I usually monkey >>> >> > patch the function to send email and store the emails in a global >>> >> > variable for later access. >>> >> > >>> >> >>> >> In automated acceptance testing context I believe it would be >>> >> appropriate to implement a mail server. With unit tests, stubbing the >>> >> mail server with a mock would've been fine. >>> >> >>> >> Dhananjay >>> _______________________________________________ >>> BangPypers mailing list >>> BangPypers@python.org >>> http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/bangpypers >>> >> _______________________________________________ >> BangPypers mailing list >> BangPypers@python.org >> http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/bangpypers >> > > > > -- > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > http://blog.dhananjaynene.com twitter: @dnene google plus: > http://gplus.to/dhananjaynene >
-- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- http://blog.dhananjaynene.com twitter: @dnene google plus: http://gplus.to/dhananjaynene _______________________________________________ BangPypers mailing list BangPypers@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/bangpypers
