[threeten-dev] TestNG for JTreg

[Stephen Colebourne]

I'm happy with packages of:
test.javax.time
tck.javax.time
which is I think what you are proposing.

We should also be aiming to reduce the non-TCK tests to the bare
minimum. (This may be atypical of OpenJDK, but would be appropriate
for an API where most things are public)

Stephen


On 26 November 2012 22:08, Xueming Shen <xueming.shen at oracle.com> wrote:
> It's not the issue of the behavior of TestNG.  It's the issue of how
> bootclasspath/loader and class
> loader work inside jtreg.
>
> -Sherman
>
>
> On 11/26/12 1:55 PM, Roger Riggs wrote:
>>
>> ok.
>>
>> Is the issue the behavior of TestNG or the "classpath" that TestNG is
>> invoked by jtreg?
>>
>> Roger
>>
>>
>> On 11/26/2012 4:41 PM, Xueming Shen wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi
>>>
>>> It appears it would not be on the priority list of our jtreg (our test
>>> harness) feature list to
>>> support the "desired" by Stephen. I would suggest we go for
>>>
>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sherman/jdk8_threeten/test.javax.time
>>>
>>> for now. Some of the tests can be updated to use the public APIs fairly
>>> easily.
>>>
>>> If you guys agree, I can do a push to re-org the directory and package
>>> name first. And
>>> we go from there.
>>>
>>> -Sherman
>>>
>>> On 11/22/12 3:00 AM, Stephen Colebourne wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On 22 November 2012 06:43, Xueming Shen <xueming.shen at oracle.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sherman/jdk8_threeten/test.javax.time
>>>>>
>>>>> This is the current "working" version, which puts all tests under
>>>>> <jdk>/test/javax/time and categorizes the tests into "test", the
>>>>> "normal" unit tests, and "tck" the tck tests. The tests for
>>>>> package-private
>>>>> classes/interfaces (mainly the "format" packages) will need to be
>>>>> updated.
>>>>>
>>>>> The "alternative", which is what Stephen is asking, is
>>>>>
>>>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sherman/jdk8_threeten/test.javax.time2,
>>>>
>>>> Clearly I prefer the second. I believe that non-TCK tests should have
>>>> the ability to test the package-scope API.
>>>>
>>>> However, I do note from the OpenJDK source tree that this isn't how
>>>> the current tests work. Obviously OpenJDK has a different
>>>> heritage/style to the rest of the world...
>>>>
>>>> I also do not see any distinction in OpenJDK tests between TCK and
>>>> non-TCK. How is that generally done?
>>>>
>>>> Stephen
>>>
>>>
>>
>