RFC: blackbox tests are not integration tests

[Martin Pool]

2009/9/21 Ian Clatworthy <ian.clatworthy at canonical.com>:
> Martin Pool wrote:
>> 2009/9/17 Robert Collins <robertc at robertcollins.net>:
>>> Thus, I propose 3 new test types (and following our current conventions,
>>> that means 3 new subdirs):
>>> bzrlib.tests.acceptance
>>> bzrlib.tests.integration
>>> bzrlib.tests.cli
>>>
>>> The goal would be to end up with no blackbox tests, all tests being
>>> tuned to be more aligned with their actual intent and placed into one of
>>> those 3 containers, *or* moved to be a much more precise test.
>
> Sounds good to me.

After some more discussion with Robert we decided (iirc) to defer
separation of the acceptance and integration tests until we can more
clearly define what the technical difference will be.  However, we are
going to start splitting out the cli tests.  It's going to be an
evolutionary process as we get a feel for the best technique to use in
each case.

>> After discussion (or silent acquiescence :-) you should add this to
>> the developer guide.
>
> We have a Testing Guide which is a better place for this material. It
> needs a *lot* of content added IMO, building on all the great work being
> done to improve our testing policies and infrastructure.

True, I should have said "developer docs" more broadly.

-- 
Martin <http://launchpad.net/~mbp/>