On Sat, Aug 7, 2010 at 3:35 PM, Trevor Parscal <tparscal(a)wikimedia.org>wrote;wrote:
I'm not /totally/ opposed to breaking away from
the standard terminology
of unit/integration/acceptance testing... We could call it something
more descriptive than system though - perhaps "client"...
Going with names like "unit" and "client" have the advantage that the
names
document what type of tests that they are, with the framework not really
being important.
However, names like "selenium" and "phpunit" have the advantage that,
should
we decide to start moving to a new framework (say, the fictional "foounit"),
we put the new foounit tests in a foounit directory, keep the phpunit tests
in the phpunit directory, and there's never a confusing mixing of tests from
different frameworks in the same directory.
It's not that big of a deal either way. My 2c: pick something reasonably
consistent, then put a very clear README.txt file that describes what is in
the tests/ directory. That way, if we decide to use the framework name, and
if someone doesn't know that "selenium" is for
system/client/acceptance/whateveryouwanttocallit testing, they can look at
the README and figure it out.
Rob