Are you using PageTester or Selenium?
Thinking about this a bit more, I've taken this approach with
PageTester, where it's easy: just specify the appropriate module (or
add it) as necessary.
I've also taken this approach with selenium testing, but typically
setup a "testing" application (similar to, eg, app1, app2, etc. in
tapestry-core/src/test).
Are you trying to integration test the application via selenium (ie,
extending AbstractionIntegrationTestSuite), but also trying to
override select services with "testing" implementations?
In that case, what I would probably do is to forget the @SubModule bit
(but still use Alias/AliasOverrides), and then you can add your test
module via the tapestry.modules system property, as in:
tapestry
.modules
=
com
.example
.app
.testing
.services.TestModule,com.example.app.testing.services.TestModule2 and
so forth.
Cheers,
Robert
On Feb 26, 2009, at 2/264:41 PM , Hugo Palma wrote:
I was just going to try out the alias/alias override but stopped
before i
got to that.
How do i tell my application to use a different application module
when
testing ?
On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 4:04 AM, Robert Zeigler <robe...@scazdl.org>
wrote:
One thing I've done is to create a test module that @SubModule's the
application module, and then uses alias/alias overrides to spot-
override
services from the sub-module (the application module) with test-
specific
services. Works pretty well.
Robert
On Feb 23, 2009, at 2/236:06 PM , Hugo Palma wrote:
I'm implementing my user interface tests using selenium and the
provided
AbstractIntegrationTestSuite class. Everything is working fine.
Still, i'd like to replace my DAO services implementation with
some mock
ones when i run the tests. The problem is that the services are
declared
in
the application module so how do i override those declarations for
testing
purposes ?
One workaround i found was to pass a VM parameter when i run the
test goal
and then in the bind method implementation i check for the
parameter and
declare either the prodution implementation or the mock one.
Although this
works it forces me to implement the mock objects in the main
sources and
not
on the test sources where they should be.
I was wondering if anyone had a better way to do this.
Thanks.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@tapestry.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@tapestry.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@tapestry.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@tapestry.apache.org
