Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

shibboleth-dev - Re: Mockrunner 0.3.6

Subject: Shibboleth Developers

List archive

Re: Mockrunner 0.3.6


Chronological Thread 
  • From: Chad La Joie <>
  • To:
  • Subject: Re: Mockrunner 0.3.6
  • Date: Fri, 18 Nov 2005 14:17:40 -0500
  • Organization: UIS - Project Sentinel

Walter Hoehn wrote:
On Nov 17, 2005, at 9:28 AM, Chad La Joie wrote:

General comment. I was specifically avoiding the user of terms like "unit test" and "integration test", I didn't even want to use "functional test" but couldn't think of anything better. I avoided them because people have different meanings for each of these terms and I wanted to avoid any semantic war.


I think we needs these sorts of terms. It doesn't matter so much how we define them, as long as we all agree on their meaning.

Yes, once we know what we're actually talking about we can apply terms to them. I haven't heard any more responses so maybe we've got that part covered now

Walter Hoehn wrote:
I'm not one to argue against more testing, but I do think you loose testing value as you become less specific about what you are testing. It becomes hard to understand exactly what you are testing and hard to trace problems to their root. Having said that, if it is easier to do system testing on the SP by using output of the IdP, so be it. I'm 100% not sure I buy this, though, since this limits you to testing exactly what the IdP can emit at the time of the test.


I don't necessarily agree here. I think if you try to use these higher level tests as way to provide test coverage for the lower level (individual class or subsystem) tests then yes, I think you loose value. If you use these to tests that all the components are working together (i.e. that the sum of the parts isn't introducing problems) then you gain value.


Maybe so, but there is almost nothing but overlap here, unless the highest level tests are very minimal.

In the same vein then there is nothing but overlap between testing individual classes and testing something like the AA. The tests at the higher level are simply to test that individually tested components at the lower level interoperate correctly. It's almost always the case that as you get higher up the stack the tests become fewer, I would imagine the same would be true here.

--
Chad La Joie 315Q St. Mary's Hall
OIS-Middleware 202.687.0124



Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.16.

Top of Page