Cleaning up inheritance tests

From: Kevin Menard (kmenar..ervprise.com)
Date: Thu Mar 27 2008 - 22:45:43 EDT

  • Next message: Andrus Adamchik: "Re: GSoC2008, a project proposal"

    Hi Andrus,

    I just reverted the data map to the old structure and added the new entities
    necessary for testing. I agree that this is much cleaner now.

    I've also added a patch to CAY-1009 that I think fixes the problem. If you
    get an opportunity, could you please review it?

    Thanks,
    Kevin

    On 3/16/08 6:32 PM, "Andrus Adamchik" <andru..bjectstyle.org> wrote:

    >
    > On Mar 17, 2008, at 12:06 AM, Kevin Menard wrote:
    >
    >> I was also trying to avoid entity overload for the testing.
    >
    > But I think that's what sort of happened in the quoted commits?
    >
    >> The test cases
    >> are very much structured around being able to load a particular
    >> DataMap, so
    >> coming up with a new one means a new test case as well. Not
    >> necessarily a
    >> bad thing, just explaining a bit more.
    >
    > I was thinking of adding new entities to the existing people DataMap.
    > This should be good enough to separate the test cases. Also we don't
    > have to keep using meaningful entity names (Person, Address), just
    > something like Entity1, Subentity1 should be ok. The only
    > consideration in naming is to avoid using the word Test in the names,
    > as this confuses Maven surefire sometimes.
    >
    > Andrus
    >



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0.0 : Thu Mar 27 2008 - 22:46:16 EDT