Jun 8th, 2009, 11:49 AM
I was keen to check out the possibilities for extending Roo, so checked out the code base. I realise that the project is only at M1, so wasn't expecting detailed documentation, but assumed that I'd be able to get the general intent by studying the unit tests.
Unfortunately, when I attempted this, I could only find three unit tests in the entire code base, which, as well as scuppering my plans for looking at extension mechanisms, made me feel distinctly nervous about investing my time learning more about Roo.
Have I missed something? Is there some special testing framework with an unusual naming convention?
Jun 10th, 2009, 01:02 AM
Most of testing takes place by using the *.roo scripts and then checking the resultant project receives passing integration tests (which in turn means it compiles) and also that its web tier passes via Selenium. Given we're testing the created user projects using automated means - and this highlights the numerous subtle interactions between different add-ons are operating as normal - we haven't spent too much energy thus far on testing the Roo-specific units are working correctly in isolation.
Jun 10th, 2009, 06:51 AM
Thanks for replying Ben, that reassures me from a quality point of view, but that approach definitely makes it more difficult for someone new to the codebase to dive in and get a handle on the intent of particular classes.