Re: JUnit shouldn't be advertised as only for "unit testing"

On Mon, Oct 6, 2014 at 1:45 PM, Stephen Connolly
[email protected] [junit] <[email protected]> wrote:

> I'm not saying not to use it for other types of tests, more saying that it
> has a primary focus and using it for other purposes can get friction.
> Personally I write my integration and acceptance tests to be independent of
> sequencing effects and isolated as I find that such tests provide better
> value... but I have worked on projects where that wasn't the case and JUnit
> would get used for unit tests and TestNg for the integration tests (as
> TestNG provides a sequencing contract)


Yes, the lack of functional testing features is what led me to create
TestNG in the first place. Some of the functionalities that make functional
testing easier are:

- Ordering of tests (avoids needlessly rerunning tests and provides more
accurate reports about failures and skips).
- Parallel runs (all these test methods should be able to run on different
threads with one single switch, even dependent ones).
- Being able to organize test methods in logical groups (as opposed to
using packages, which is very limited).
- An external configuration file so that multiple test settings can be
specified, shared among coworkers and run in different environments.

-- 
Cédric




-- 
Cédric