sca-bindings message
[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]
| [List Home]
Subject: Review comments for JMS test cases BJM_600xx.
- From: Simon Holdsworth <simon_holdsworth@uk.ibm.com>
- To: sca-bindings@lists.oasis-open.org
- Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2010 14:12:47 +0100
Review comments for JMS testcase artefacts
for BJM_60xx:
BJM_60001_TestCase: This is a SHOULD
NOT and therefore this test should be deleted.
BJM_60002_TestCase: OK
BJM_60003_1_TestCase: This and
the two following cases all use the same name for the composite - Test_BJM_6003.composite.
I would have expected each to be named after the test variant as the file
contents are not the same. My concern with this test is that the
use of the reply destination and correlation scheme is somewhat implicit
as the test itself has no visibility to the response message sent from
the service. Also the service in the composite in each case should
have the same correlationScheme as the reference. As they don't currently
I'm surprised the tests work as they are. Compare this approach with
that taken in 60013 which checks the JMS messages.
BJM_60003_2_TestCase: As above
BJM_60003_3_TestCase: As above
BJM_60004_TestCase: This test should
be changed to follow the approach in 60013_2 explicitly checking the JMSReplyTo
BJM_60005_TestCase: This test should
be changed to follow the approach in 60013 explicitly checking the JMSReplyTo
BJM_60006_TestCase: Untestable and should
be deleted
BJM_60007_TestCase: OK
BJM_60007_2_TestCase: OK
BJM_60008_TestCase: OK
BJM_60010_TestCase: Duplicate of 30003-30005,
although this statement is specifically about a service. 60003 covers
the case for a reference so I don't think this test 60010 is necessary.
Should be deleted
BJM_60011_TestCase: OK
BJM_60012_TestCase: OK
BJM_60013_TestCase: OK; This test is
equivalent to 60005 "use generated response destination" with
a bidirectional i/f. 60005 implementation should be almost the same
as this one.
BJM_60013_2_TestCase: Missing from testcase
document; this one is equivalent to 60004 "use specified response
destination" with a bidirectional i/f. However the testcase just checks
for a non-null JMSReplyTo, it does not check for the specific value provided
in the composite.
BJM_60014_1_TestCase: OK; Should be
named BJM_60014_1_1_TestCase in the TC doc.
BJM_60014_2_TestCase: OK; Should be
named BJM_60014_1_2_TestCase in the TC doc.
BJM_60014a_TestCase: OK; Should be named
BJM_60014_2_TestCase in the TC doc.
BJM_60015_1_TestCase: OK
BJM_60015_2_TestCase: OK
BJM_60015_3_TestCase: OK
BJM_60016_TestCase: I would expect to
see a JMS callback binding in the composite, there's no callback at all
currently. In this test there should be no scaCallbackDestination
property, no JMSReplyTo and no callback binding destination, rather than
an invalid destination specified via scaCallbackDestination.
BJM_60017_1_TestCase: Need some help
understanding what this test is doing.
BJM_60017_2_TestCase: Need some help
understanding what this test is doing.
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
[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]
| [List Home]