nunit-core team mailing list archive

[simon misys <711330@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

> So are you saying that you might create an assembly with no tests, but
> later add tests to it? I guess that means you sometimes put tests into
> the same assembly as the code they are testing.

Sort of.  We already have many assemblies (40) without tests.  There is
one assembly with tests, but no one apart from the developer who added
it knew about it because he didn't create a top-level NUnit project for
all to see.  Only if you opened the assembly in NUnit (or looked at the
specific code) would you be aware there were any tests.  (None of the
other developers have made any use of NUnit before.)  But we plan to add
tests bit by bit, and all developers will do this, as and when
appropriate and convenient.  Basically, we are not doing anything like
enough regression testing and we want to address that with NUnit.

In the meantime, we want to create a top-level NUnit project that
contains all (current) assemblies.  That way, I think all developers are
likely to be reminded that there are tests; all developers are likely to
be aware that there are assemblies that aught to have tests but don't;
developers don't have to check whether they need to add the assembly to
the NUnit project when they do add tests (they do need to add new
assemblies of course, but that is rarer than adding new tests to an
existing assembly, and I suppose it's also possible that a new assembly
might have no tests as you suggest); automated test runs are easier.

If we only added an assembly to the project as and when tests were added
to it, I think we run the risk of developers not being encouraged to add
tests; run the risk of forgetting to add the assembly to the NUnit
project when tests are first added to an assembly.  We want to set up
the process to make it as likely and easy as possible that things will
be done right.

Of course, test-free assemblies don't result in failure _status_ either
in the progress bar or the client runner.  However, the gripe I had was
that test-free assemblies are _shown_ with a failure icon in the tree
display, and that won't help our preferred process.

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of NUnit
Developers, which is subscribed to NUnit V2.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/711330

Title:
  Test-free assembly given failure icon in tree display

Status in NUnit V2 Test Framework:
  New

Bug description:
  A test-free assembly is shown with the failure icon, ie, an X with red
  background, in the GUI runner tree display, as is its parent(s).

  However, the progress bar is green, as expected (assuming all other
  tests pass).

  Why would we want to include a test-free assembly?  Because we want to
  create a single NUnit project for an existing large solution (40+
  Visual Studio projects) containing all of its assemblies and
  executables.  As we progressively add new tests to our product, we
  want NUnit to automatically pick them up without anyone having to
  remember to make sure the corresponding assembly/executable have been
  added to the NUnit project (and Debug/Release configurations).

  It is off-putting (to say the least) and misleading for NUnit label such test-free assemblies as failures in the tree display.
  It also contradicts what NUnit reports in the rest of the GUI (and when the NUnit project is run with the console runner).

  So, I think NUnit should not show test-free assemblies as failures in
  the tree display.  I think they should count as a success, ie, shown
  with a check with green background.

  Thanks.