Got it! Thanks Alex! -----Original Message----- From: Alex Huang [mailto:alex.hu...@citrix.com] Sent: Monday, January 07, 2013 4:00 PM To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org Subject: RE: [Discuss] Integration test
Marvin is testing for an integrated system. Here, we're talking about testing an integration contract. This means providing tests that represents how a plugin would be used by cloudstack. A plugin writer should be able to run their plugin within this test suite WITHOUT cloudstack and get some guarantee that their plugin supports the interface correctly and won't break anything. This is purely developer level integration test. This means that if someone changes the logic in the subsystem, they are also responsible for changing the integration test cases. Note that this type of testing cannot replace marvin. --Alex > -----Original Message----- > From: Edison Su [mailto:edison...@citrix.com] > Sent: Monday, January 07, 2013 3:13 PM > To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org > Subject: RE: [Discuss] Integration test > > No, marvin is suitable for API test, can't test java maven project > directly. Here, the integration test, is more about test case for a > set of java maven projects, so it must be tested by using java test > framework, either junit or testNG. For unit test, test for an > individual maven project, it's ok to use Junit. But for integration test, I'd > prefer testNG. > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Sudha Ponnaganti [mailto:sudha.ponnaga...@citrix.com] > > Sent: Monday, January 07, 2013 3:07 PM > > To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org > > Subject: RE: [Discuss] Integration test > > > > Edison, > > > > Current python framework ( marvin) covers several of the > components/sub- > > modules and system ( end to end) tests. Functionally it is serving > > the > purpose. > > Is this proposal to substitute that as well as current Junit framework?? > > > > Thanks > > /Sudha > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Edison Su [mailto:edison...@citrix.com] > > Sent: Monday, January 07, 2013 2:11 PM > > To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org > > Subject: [Discuss] Integration test > > > > Hi All, > > As Cloudstack is becoming more modularized, we can start > > thinking > about > > how to test these components. > > The organization of maven projects in cloudstack. At lowest > > level, it's a maven project. The modularized component, means a > > group of maven projects. The subsystem, means a logical group of > > components. A system, will be build on a lot of subsystems. For > > example, there will be a system called, cloud-engine, which is a > > server, provides restful API service to other systems(e.g API server). > > Cloud-engine will have a set of subsystems: > > computing, storage, network etc. For each subsystem, will have a > > group of > > components: e.g. storage subsystem will include volume/image/snapshot .. > > components. For each component, will have a set of maven projects, > > for example, volume component will have a maven project, called > > storage- volume, and a lot of plugin projects, such as > > (storage-volume-plugin- > solidfire, > > storage-volume-plugin-netapp etc). > > Based on above hierarchy, the integration test will happen at > > different > > levels: at component level, at subsystem level, at system level etc. > > I want > to > > bring up the discuss about how to organize integration tests, and > > which integration test framework should we use. > > First, how to organize integration tests? The organization will > > be affected/constrained by the dependency between maven projects you > want > > to test. > > 1. Will the integration test at each level have its own maven > > project? > Or > > we put all the integration test cases into one giant maven project? > > I'd > prefer > > one maven project at one level, as it looks like more cleaner. For > > example, there will be a storage-integration-test maven project, > > which depends on storage-volume-integration-test, > > storage-image-integration-test, and so > on, > > while storage-volume-integration-test will depend on storage-volume, > > storage-volume-plugin-solidfire, and storage-volume-plugin-netapp > > and so on. When you write test case at each level, you only focus on > > the limited > area > > you want to test: the design of test case and the configuration file > > of each test case, will/can only be specific to the area. Hope it > > will make writing test case easier. > > 2. Which test framework we should use? Junit or testNG? I > > was sold to testNG by its feature sets: parametrized test case, > > group test cases, > running > > test case in parallel at different level(method, class etc), test > > case dependency etc. You can find out more information about testNG > > at > > http://kaczanowscy.pl/tomek/sites/default/files/testng_vs_junit.txt.slidy_. > > html#(1). > > But in order to integrate testNG with Spring, need a little bit coding. > > For example, may need to add a listener in testNG, to inject @DB > annotation, > > and need to make sure mockito will work. I created a base testNG class: > > CloudStackTestNGBase, which can read configuration parameters from a > > testNG config xml file, setup @DB context for each test case etc. > > > > Comments/feedback are welcome! > > > >
