On my current project, we've tried to achieve a balance. The standard "build" that happens after normal editing runs the in-memory subset of our unit tests. (On a fast laptop, it adds less than 7 seconds to the build.) And I've arranged to fail the build if any test fails. Nobody complains, and large parts of our application stay unbroken.
The "live data" tests run separately, since they required creating a test schema and populating it with test data (and this requires access to a server, which isn't guaranteed for various semi-legimate reasons). This separation of tests works fairly well except that I can't get people to run the damn database tests on a regular basis. Waiting for the overnight build to catch problems takes too long; problems can multiply unseen in the interim.
There are technical aspects of this problem (e.g., we could, for a small expenditure of time, set up a continuous integration and test environment), but I think the bigger problem here is social.
Social pressure works well in colocated projects. One need only walk a few steps before applying a bitchslap. And "Whoever checks in broken code has to wear the funny hat to the morning meeting" can be very effective. I'm looking for techniques for applying pressure in a distributed team.
How about this... (Score:1)
Re:How about this... (Score:2)
Carrot and Stick method... (Score:1)
More than once I've seen folks sign off on tests, but there was no way they could have run the tests since by observation
How difficult is it? (Score:1)
Does it block the development? (can it be run in the background?)
Can it be run on both what's checked in and what's yet to be checked in?
Re:How difficult is it? (Score:2)
To do the same, and install in a Tomcat server, the command is
To compile the system, run the in-memory tests, then run the databases tests, typing
does the trick, assuming that you have access to a live database server. Each developer gets their own sandbox, so there's no risk of A stepping on B.
All of this is incredibly simple, but people wh
Re testing (Score:1)
On my current project we have an automated background process running the full test suite every couple of hours. If the tests pass, the code is tagged and checked out onto the staging server which is the first time the client gets to see/play with it. If anyone breaks the build, then no code gets promoted to staging. There's always at least one of us with some new code we want in front of the client so if the stick needs to be waved, we take it in turns to wave it.