JMS TestCase artefact review comments - 300XX

[Simon Holdsworth <simon_holdsworth@uk.ibm.com>]

 Here are my review comments from
the BJM_300XX test cases, I will continue to look at the remainder of the
test cases this week:

General comments:  

o Fixed comments in many .java files
which did not have correct testcase name; fixed test case names in some
.composite files.
o Many tests are based on BaseJMSTestRunner
although there are no JMS message being sent as part of the test.  Most
of them include a "fake" JMS destination name which is not needed.
Need to decide if these should be changed.
o Sets of variant tests which are expected
to be successful could be contained in the same contribution. e.g. 30025_*
don't actually need their own separate top-level directories, however I
don't think its worth changing the existing ones unless you want to.

Specific comments:

BJM_30001_TestCase: OK
BJM_30002_TestCase: OK; Actually now
split into _1 (destination) _2 (connectionFactory) so TestCase document
update needed.
BJM_30003_TestCase: OK
BJM_30004_TestCase: OK
BJM_30005_TestCase: OK
BJM_30011A_TestCase: OK (BaseJMSTestRunner)
BJM_30011C_TestCase: OK (BaseJMSTestRunner)
BJM_30011D_TestCase: OK (BaseJMSTestRunner)
BJM_30012A_TestCase: OK (BaseJMSTestRunner)
BJM_30012C_TestCase: OK (BaseJMSTestRunner)
BJM_30012D_TestCase: OK (BaseJMSTestRunner)
BJM_30013A_TestCase: Not clear how we
are testing the "and cannot be created there" part of the statement.
(BaseJMSTestRunner)
BJM_30013C_TestCase: Not clear how we
are testing the "and cannot be created there" part of the statement.
(BaseJMSTestRunner)
BJM_30013D_TestCase: Not clear how we
are testing the "and cannot be created there" part of the statement.
(BaseJMSTestRunner)
BJM_30014A_TestCase: OK (BaseJMSTestRunner)

BJM_30014C_TestCase: OK (BaseJMSTestRunner)
changed to use TEST_BJM_3014_Topic as the existing resource of the wrong
type to be consistent
BJM_30014D_TestCase: OK (BaseJMSTestRunner)

BJM_30015Aa_TestCase: OK (BaseJMSTestRunner)
BJM_30015Ab_TestCase: OK (BaseJMSTestRunner)
BJM_30015Ac_TestCase: OK (BaseJMSTestRunner)
BJM_30015Ca_TestCase: OK (BaseJMSTestRunner)
BJM_30015Cb_TestCase: OK (BaseJMSTestRunner)
 non-existent destination name changed to just "DoesntExist"
to be consistent
BJM_30015Cc_TestCase: OK (BaseJMSTestRunner)
BJM_30015Da_TestCase: OK (BaseJMSTestRunner)
BJM_30015Db_TestCase: OK (BaseJMSTestRunner)
 
BJM_30015Dc_TestCase: OK (BaseJMSTestRunner)
BJM_30017_TestCase: OK
BJM_30018_TestCase: OK
BJM_30019_TestCase: OK - I believe this
being removed (dest != AS(dest)) 
BJM_30020_TestCase: OK
BJM_30021_TestCase: OK
BJM_30022_TestCase: OK - I believe this
being removed (dest != AS(dest))
BJM_30023_TestCase: OK
BJM_30024_1_TestCase: Expiration used
as timeToLive.
BJM_30024_2_TestCase: Has comment: FIXME:
what to do for time to live?  Expiration != timeToLive
BJM_30024_3_TestCase: Expiration used
as timeToLive.
BJM_30024_4_TestCase: Expiration used
as timeToLive.
BJM_30025_1_TestCase: OK, but no test
for the user property type.  I'd suggest extending this one test to
have one property of each valid JMS type.
BJM_30025_2_TestCase: OK, but no test
for the user property type.  I'd suggest extending this one test to
have one property of each valid JMS type.
BJM_30026_1_TestCase: Looks like this
test will result in a message being left on the destination?  Also
checkReplyMessage does nothing so I removed it.
BJM_30026_2_TestCase: Looks like this
test will result in a message being left on the destination?  Also
checkReplyMessage does nothing so I removed it.
BJM_30026_3_TestCase: Client - don't
understand how setting the priority is relevant to this testcase. Also
checkReplyMessage does nothing so I removed it.
BJM_30029_TestCase: OK
BJM_30034_TestCase: OK
BJM_30036_TestCase: OK
BJM_30037A: Not clear how we are testing
the "and cannot be created there" part of the statement. (BaseJMSTestRunner)
BJM_30037C: Not clear how we are testing
the "and cannot be created there" part of the statement. (BaseJMSTestRunner)
BJM_30037D: Not clear how we are testing
the "and cannot be created there" part of the statement. (BaseJMSTestRunner)

Regards, Simon

Simon Holdsworth

---

Unless stated otherwise above:
IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number 741598.
Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU