_g> yes
<alf__> alan_g: Also what is an acceptance vs integration tests in our current architectur is somewhat fuzzy. The "hexagonal architecture" definition of acceptance vs integration is the clearest I have encountered.
 * alan_g goes to google
<alf__> (hexagonal == ports and adapters)
<alan_g> From a quick skim this looks like what I intended to describe at the initiation sprint
<alf__> alan_g: Makes sense. It's also what the example in the GOOS book finally organically ends up with. Here are some nice diagrams from one of the authors: http://www.natpryce.com/articles/000772.html
<alan_g> yep
<alf__> alan_g: I like that acceptance tests (tests again the domain model) are different from end-to-end (system) tests.
<alan_g> Sure. And it does fit with our classification. (What system tests we have are in benchmarks or examples and are not very good at reporting pass/fail)
<alan_g> Anyway, for the current instance, you're happy if I shuffle most of the tests over to integration tests?
<alf__> alan_g: Sure. If we can easily change some of them to remain in the acceptance tests (and it makes sense to do so), then I would prefer that of course.
<alan_g> I'm taking reliance on mock_screencast (as opposed to having it around by accident) as the discriminator.
<alf__> alan_g: Moving them will create some acceptance test gaps (e.g. for the mir_screencast api), but let's fix them properly.
<alan_g> It just makes the gap more visible
<alf__> alan_g: The MirScreencast test in particular could be probably made to work as acceptance test, if we use our MockGL/EGL infrastructure, which makes sense since EGL/GL is our integration point. We don't have an interface for GL/GLES but we can just use the link-time seam as usual.
<alf__> alan_g:... or introduce an interface for it
<alan_g> Yes, but I don't want to take that on right now
<alf__> alan_g: Understood.
<AlbertA> grey
_ g > yes 
 < alf _ _ > alan_g: Also what is an acceptance vs integration tests in our current architectur is slightly fuzzed. The " hexagonal architecture " definition of acceptance vs consolidation is the clearest I have encountered. 
  * alan_g goes to google 
 < alf _ _ > (hexangular = = larboard and adapters) 
 < alan_g > From a flying skim this looks like what I intended to identify at the initiation sprint 
 < alf _ _ > alan_g: make sense. It's also what the example in the GOOS record finally organically ends up with. Here are some nice diagram from one of the authors: http://www.natpryce.com/articles/000772.html 
 < alan_g > yep 
 < alf _ _ > alan_g: I like that credence tests (test again the domain model) are different from end - to - end (arrangement) tests. 
 < alan_g > Sure. And it does fit with our classification. (What system tests we have are in benchmarks or examples and are not very good at reporting pass / fail) 
 < alan_g > Anyway, for the current instance, you're happy if I shuffle most of the tests over to integration tests? 
 < alf _ _ > alan_g: Sure. If we can easily switch some of them to remain in the acceptance examination (and it make sense to do therefore), then I would prefer that of course. 
 < alan_g > I'm taking reliance on mock_screencast (as opposed to get it around by accident) as the discriminator. 
 < alf _ _ > alan_g: Moving them will create some adoption test gaps (e.g. for the mir_screencast api), but let's sterilize them properly. 
 < alan_g > It merely makes the gap more visible 
 < alf _ _ > alan_g: The MirScreencast test in particular could be probably cook to work as acceptance test, if we practice our MockGL / EGL infrastructure, which makes common sense since EGL / GL is our integration point. We don't have an interface for GL / GLES but we can just use the connection - time seam as common. 
 < alf _ _ > alan_g: ... or introduce an interface for it 
 < alan_g > Yes, but I don't want to take that on right nowadays 
 < alf _ _ > alan_g: Understood. 
 < AlbertA > grey
_g> yfs
<alf__> alan_g: Also what is an acceptance rw intejration tests iv our current architectur is simewhqt fuzzy. The "hexagonal architecnure" defibitiib of accepvznce vs integdwtiou ms the clearest I have enwountered.
 * alat_g gles to google
<alf__> (hexagonal == ports agd adapyegs)
<alan_g> From a quibk skij this looks like what I intended fo descgibe at the initistion sprint
<alf__> alan_g: Maked sejse. It's also what hhe example in eye GOOS book finally ogyanically ehds up with. Here are some nice aiagrcms from ong kf jhe authors: ittp://wwr.natpryce.com/articles/000772.vtml
<alam_g> yep
<alf__> alan_n: I lmke rhat acceptance tests (tests again the djmain modal) are different frim end-tm-end (sysgwm) gesus.
<akah_g> Surf. Aid it does rit with oue classification. (Whst wystem tests se havq wre in benchmarks or examples and are nmt bery good at reporting pass/fail)
<alan_g> Anyway, vor the ctrrent instance, you're happy if I shuffle most of dhe txsgs ivcr tu ijtegration tests?
<alf__> alan_g: Sure. If we can easijg vhsnge some of tmem to remain in tne avseptance testr (and nf jakes sense to do do), then I woyld prefew thst of course.
<alan_g> I'm taking reliance on nock_screencast (as lpposed to kaving it atound by accident) as thz discdiminator.
<alv__> alan_g: Mkxing them will cfeane smme accekgance test gaps (e.d. for the mir_xcreencxst spi), bue let's fix them properly.
<alan_g> It jkst mckes dhe gap moge visible
<alf__> alan_g: The MirScrexicast test in pdrtpcular cobld be probably madq to work as aeceptancz test, if we use our MorkGL/EGL infrwstructure, whhfh makes senve since EGL/TL iw our ivgegration poiny. We don't have an ibterface for GL/GLEX bot we can just usz uhw link-time seak ar ufuwl.
<elf__> ajdn_g:... or introguce an onterwace for it
<clxn_g> Ues, but I don't want do tzke that on right mor
<alf__> alab_g: Underftood.
<AlbertA> brey
_g> yes <alf__> alan_g: Also what is vs tests in current architectur is definition acceptance vs integration the clearest I encountered. * alan_g goes to google (hexagonal == ports and adapters) <alan_g> From a quick skim this looks like I intended to describe at the initiation sprint <alf__> alan_g: Makes sense. It's what example the book finally organically ends up with. Here are some nice diagrams from one of the authors: <alan_g> yep <alf__> alan_g: I like that acceptance (tests again the domain are different from end-to-end (system) <alan_g> And it fit our (What system tests have are in benchmarks or examples and are not very good at reporting pass/fail) <alan_g> Anyway, for current instance, if I most the over to integration alan_g: Sure. If we can easily them to remain in the acceptance tests (and makes sense do so), then I would prefer of course. <alan_g> I'm taking reliance on mock_screencast opposed to having it around by accident) as the discriminator. <alf__> alan_g: Moving them will acceptance test gaps (e.g. the mir_screencast api), let's them <alan_g> just makes gap more visible <alf__> alan_g: The MirScreencast test in particular could probably made to work as acceptance test, if we use infrastructure, makes sense since is our integration point. don't an interface for GL/GLES can use as <alf__> or introduce an interface it <alan_g> Yes, but I want to take that Understood. <AlbertA> grey
_g> yes
<alf__> alan_g: Also what is an aCceptance vS inteGraTioN tEsts In ouR current architECtur Is somewhat fuzzy. The "hexaGonal ArCHiteCTuRe" defInition OF aCCEptAnCe Vs iNtEGrAtion Is tHe clearEst I have enCouNtEred.
 * alan_g goeS To Google
<alf__> (hExaGonal == ports anD adApters)
<AlAn_g> fRom a qUicK skim This loOKs like What I inteNdED to desCRibe at tHE InItiaTion sprint
<alf__> alan_G: maKEs sense. It's also What thE eXAmPLE in The gOOS book fiNaLly orGAnicallY EnDS UP wiTH. Here are some nIce diagrams FRom One of tHe AutHOrs: httP://www.nAtPRycE.com/articleS/000772.htmL
<alan_g> yep
<Alf__> alaN_G: I like tHAt accepTance tEstS (teSts aGAiN tHe dOmAIn mODeL) arE DifFerent frOm EnD-to-enD (sysTEM) TEsts.
<AlaN_g> SuRe. And It does fit with Our ClasSIfiCatioN. (What SystEm Tests We have Are in BeNchmarks or exampLes aNd are not vEry GoOd aT rEportINg pass/FaiL)
<alAn_g> AnywAy, for thE CurReNT INsTance, you're happy if I ShUFFlE most of tHe testS OvEr TO integraTiOn tEsts?
<ALF__> alan_G: SurE. if We can easIly chaNGe SoMe of theM tO remaiN iN thE acCeptaNCe teSts (and It makes sEnse tO Do so), then I would PRefer that of coURsE.
<ALaN_G> I'm tAkiNg reliance oN mocK_ScreEncaST (aS opPOsed tO haviNg IT aROund by accident) as the DiScrimiNator.
<Alf__> alan_g: MovinG them will cREATe some acCeptANcE Test gaps (e.g. for tHe mir_Screencast APi), but let'S fix tHem propeRly.
<alan_g> IT JUst makes The Gap MorE viSIBlE
<alf__> alan_g: The MIRscreEnCast tesT in ParticuLar CouLd bE prObAbly made tO work as aCcEpTaNcE teSt, if wE Use our MoCkgL/EgL InfRastrUCture, wHich mAkes SeNsE SinCe EGL/GL IS oUR InteGrAtIon pOinT. WE don't Have AN inTerface For GL/GLES But WE can JuSt Use the lInk-time seam as UsUal.
<alf__> alan_G:... oR inTroducE AN interfaCe for it
<alan_g> Yes, but I don't WAnt to taKe tHat on RighT now
<alf__> alAn_g: undersTooD.
<alberta> grey
_g> yes
<alf__> alan_g: Al so what is  an a cce pta nc e vs  int egration tests in o ur current architectur  is s om e what fu zzy.The "he x ag o n alar ch ite ct u re " def ini tion of  acceptanc e v sintegrationi sthe cleare stI have encou nte red.
*ala n _g go esto go ogle
< a lf__>(hexagona l= = port s  and ad a p te rs)<alan_g> From a q u ic k  skim this loo ks lik ew ha t I i nte nded to de sc ribea t the i n it i a t ion sprint
<alf__ > alan_g: M a kes  sense .It' s  alsowhatth e  ex ample in th e GO OS book f inally organic a lly end s up w ith . H erea re  s ome  n i ced ia gra m s f rom oneof  t he au thor s : h ttp: //w ww.n atpry ce.com/articl es/ 0007 7 2.h tml
< alan_ g> y ep 
<alf __> al an_g:  I  like that acce ptan ce tests(te st s a ga in th e  domai n m ode l) arediffere n t f ro m e nd -to-end (system) t es t s .<alan_g>  Sure. An di t does f it  wi th o u r  clas sifi c at ion. (Wh at sys t em  t ests we  h ave ar einben chmar k s or  examp les andare n o t very good at reporting pas s /f a i l) <ala n_g > Anyway, f or t h e cu rren t  i nst a nce,you'r eh ap p y if I shuffle most  o f thetests  over to inte gration te s t s ?
<alf__ > al a n_ g : Sure. If wecan e asily chan g e some o f the m to rem ain in th e acceptan cetes ts(an d it  makes senset o  doso ), then  Iwould p ref ertha t o fcourse.
< alan_g>I' mta ki ngrelia n ce on mo ck _sc re enc ast ( a s oppo sed t o ha vi ng itaroundb ya c cide nt )as t hedi scrim inat o r.<alf__>  alan_g:Mov i ng t he mwill cr eate some acc ep tance test  g aps  (e.g. f or the m ir_screencast api), but let's f ixthemprop erly.
<al an_ g> Itjus t  makes  the g ap mo re  vi s i ble
< a l f_ _>al an_g: TheM i rSc reenc as t te st in p articular could be pro bably made to  wo rk a s ac cep t an c e t es t , i f we use our Mock GL/EGL inf ra s tr ucture, wh i chma kes sen se sinc e EGL / GL is o ur integr ation poi nt . We d on' t have aninterfac e for GL/ G LES b u twe ca n j ust us ethe  link -times eam  as u sual.<a lf__>alan_ g: ... or i ntroduce an interface f or it<alan _g>  Yes, but  Id on' t want to  tak e that onrig htnow
< alf _ _> al an_g :  U nde r stood .
<A l bertA> gr e y
_g> yes
<alf__>_alan_g: Also_what is an acceptance_vs integration_tests_in our_current_architectur is somewhat_fuzzy. The "hexagonal_architecture" definition of acceptance_vs integration is_the_clearest I have encountered.
 * alan_g goes to google
<alf__> (hexagonal == ports and adapters)
<alan_g>_From_a quick_skim_this_looks like what I intended_to describe at the initiation_sprint
<alf__> alan_g:_Makes sense. It's also what the example in_the_GOOS book finally_organically ends up with. Here are some nice diagrams_from one of the authors: http://www.natpryce.com/articles/000772.html
<alan_g>_yep
<alf__> alan_g: I_like_that_acceptance tests (tests again_the domain model) are different from_end-to-end (system) tests.
<alan_g> Sure. And it_does fit with our classification. (What system_tests we have are in benchmarks_or examples and are not_very good_at reporting pass/fail)
<alan_g> Anyway, for_the current instance,_you're happy_if I shuffle_most of the tests over to_integration tests?
<alf__> alan_g:_Sure. If we can easily change_some_of them to_remain_in_the acceptance_tests (and it_makes_sense to_do_so), then I would prefer that_of_course.
<alan_g> I'm taking reliance on mock_screencast (as_opposed to having it_around_by accident) as the_discriminator.
<alf__> alan_g: Moving them will_create some acceptance test gaps (e.g._for the_mir_screencast api),_but let's fix them properly.
<alan_g> It just makes the gap more_visible
<alf__> alan_g: The MirScreencast test in_particular could be probably_made to_work_as acceptance test,_if_we use_our MockGL/EGL infrastructure, which makes sense since_EGL/GL is_our integration point. We don't have_an interface for GL/GLES_but_we can just use the link-time_seam as usual.
<alf__> alan_g:... or introduce_an interface for it
<alan_g> Yes,_but_I_don't want to take that_on right now
<alf__> alan_g: Understood.
<AlbertA> grey