Thanks for the info, Igor! I was too fast in my conclusions.
I'll give it a try tomorrow.
WBR,
Alexey.
On Apr 21, 2010, at 20:58 , Igor Minar wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 21, 2010 at 6:14 PM, Oleksiy Stashok
> <Oleksiy.Stashok_at_sun.com> wrote:
>> Does anyone have any objections to me migrating our tests from
>> junit to
>> testng? I much prefer testng and we get quite a bit more control and
>> features for very little effort. This is probably the least
>> contentious of
>> the two but I wanted to throw that out there.
>>
>> IMO it could be a good idea.
>> Today I've reworked HTTP SuspendTest in order to test the HTTP
>> response
>> suspending in the HTTPS mode. And I like the way I was able to do
>> it using
>> testng @DataProvider, So instead of writing separate tests for HTTP
>> and
>> HTTPS, we have a single test set driven by "isSslEnabled" parameter.
>
> I'm particularly in love with junit, but just FYI: you can write
> parametrized tests with junit too
>
>> Regarding Netbeans support - it could be better for sure. For example
>> Netbeans test report doesn't distinguish parameterized tests, in my
>> case in
>> SuspendTest, when each test is being run twice in two different modes
>> HTTP/HTTPS, Netbeans reports that the test was run just once, and
>> if HTTP
>> succeeded and HTTPS failed - Netbeans reports that the test was
>> passed
>> successfully.
>
> the NB support for junits parametrized tests is wonky too. it shows
> test execution as fooTest[0], fooTest[1] ... if you have fooTest that
> is executed with two different parameter values.
>
> /i
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe_at_grizzly.dev.java.net
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help_at_grizzly.dev.java.net
>