Presenting a junit testing framework to a multi university community
1 / 18

Presenting a JUnit Testing Framework to a Multi-University Community - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

  • Uploaded on

Presenting a JUnit Testing Framework to a Multi-University Community. Romerl Elizes May 4, 2007. Agenda. Introduction Coeus JUnit Testing Framework Community of Testers Literature Review Relevance Methodology Future Work Questions and Answers References. Introduction.

I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about 'Presenting a JUnit Testing Framework to a Multi-University Community' - Audrey

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
Presenting a junit testing framework to a multi university community l.jpg

Presenting a JUnit Testing Framework to a Multi-University Community

Romerl Elizes

May 4, 2007

Agenda l.jpg

  • Introduction

  • Coeus

  • JUnit Testing Framework

  • Community of Testers

  • Literature Review

  • Relevance

  • Methodology

  • Future Work

  • Questions and Answers

  • References

Introduction l.jpg

  • Presentation goals:

    • will highlight work done on developing a JUnit Testing Framework for the Coeus Application

    • will explore its applicability to a multi-university community

    • introduce the concept of a “Community of Testers”

Coeus l.jpg

  • Coeus:

    • Electronic Research Administration (eRA) system developed by MIT

    • Automates a variety of university research functions: proposal tracking, proposal development, grant tracking, conflict of interests, internal review board, federal electronic submissions, award budgeting, and compliance standards

    • Follows an Open Source Community model called the Coeus Consortium

Coeus5 l.jpg

  • Coeus Consortium:

    • Participant universities who lack the resources can participate in the Consortium for a nominal annual fee

    • Participant universities can download the software binaries and code and customize their deployment based on university needs

    • Each university only uses a select number of modules

    • Each university can contribute back to the Consortium if it finds an innovative solution to any issues with the module

    • Includes 100+ member universities, government agencies, corporations

Coeus6 l.jpg

  • Coeus Testing:

    • Internal testing mechanism practiced by the developers

    • One week testing cycle involving select members of Consortium

    • Fixing bugs by committee vote

Coeus7 l.jpg

  • Disadvantages:

    • MIT software development team always on the move to develop product

    • Iterative development is not tested properly thus exposing upward compatibility bugs

    • Limited programming support in member universities

    • Testing infrastructure is different for each member university

Junit testing framework l.jpg
JUnit Testing Framework

  • Personal responsibilities for Coeus:

    • Hired by University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey (UMDNJ) to support the Coeus eRA

    • Introduced business intelligence reporting capabilities non-existent in Coeus product

    • Introduced a testing infrastructure that would support university needs

Junit testing framework9 l.jpg
JUnit Testing Framework

  • JUnit Testing Framework:

    • Suggested by Dr. Fred Grossman and Dr. Joe Bergin in developing software development projects based on JUnit

    • JUnit Framework encompasses JUnit, Abbot, Cactus, HtmlUnit, and HttpUnit open source software geared for testing

    • Coeus Testing for UMDNJ involved:

      • Address database table validation (Cactus)

      • Address web content validation (Cactus, HtmlUnit, HttpUnit)

      • Robot automation to test validity of GUI components (Abbot)

Community of testers l.jpg
Community of Testers

  • One Tester

    • Presented the work at Coeus User Group Conference

    • 1 university

      • has strengths in a specific set of modules

      • should focus testing its specific set of modules

      • goal is to develop 1 test per day

      • 200 tests for one year

Community of testers11 l.jpg
Community of Testers

  • Many Testers

    • 50 universities

      • 50 x 200 tests = 10,000 tests in one year

    • Author proposed a development of a Coeus Testing Community – a “Community of Testers”

      • Each university asynchronously develops its own tests

      • Contributes them back into the Consortium

      • Contributes to the development and maturity of product

      • The power of many compensates for the limitations of the one

Literature review l.jpg
Literature Review

  • Community of Practice (CoP):

    • suggests the concept of team infrastructure and multiple overlapping communities for sharing knowledge and standardizing practices (Kahkonen: “Agile Methods for Large Organizations”)

    • focuses on communities within a specific location using workshops and team building to foster collaboration

    • cannot easily be applied to a community of universities which have distance and timing factors that adversely affect collaboration

Literature review13 l.jpg
Literature Review

  • Open Source Community/Testing:

    • PyPy is an open source project to develop software infrastructure within the European Union (During: “Trouble in Paradise: the Open Source Project PyPy. EU-Funding and Agile Practices”)

    • Koponen defined a QA process in the Open Source Model (Kopenen: “Evaluation Framework for Open Source Software Maintenance”)

    • Maki-Asiala defined a QA process of Open Source components in a corporate model (Maki-Asiala: “Quality Assurance of Open Source Components Integrator Point of View”)

Relevance l.jpg

  • Work proposes the idea of a “Community of Testers”

  • Work involves an actual institution with actual stakeholders that will benefit substantially

  • Work proposes a solution based on limited funding issues that many universities experience

  • Work supports the marriage of information technology and research administration

Methodology l.jpg

  • Deployment on Four Linux Servers: Production, Backup, Development and Test

    • Tomcat Application Server

    • Oracle 9G Database Server

    • Oracle 9G Client on Windows, MacOS, and Linux

    • Coeus Application

Methodology16 l.jpg

  • Testing Methodology

  • Cactus, HtmlUnit, HttpUnit

    • 50 tests mostly database-specific ran against each server

  • Abbot

    • 20 GUI tests on proposal and awards tracking, reporting capabilities

Future work l.jpg
Future Work

  • The future of the Coeus Testing Community:

    • MIT and author are in a discussion phase on how to introduce this framework into the Consortium

    • Expected implementation: March 2008

    • Work on framework to handle multiple releases

    • Exploration of other open source methodologies to benefit this framework

References l.jpg

  • [COE] “Coeus Consortium.” Web site. Massachusetts Institute of Technology. 2007. Link:

  • [DUR] B. During. “Trouble in Paradise: the Open Source Project PyPy, EU-Funding, and Agile Practices.” In Proceedings of AGILE 2006 Conference (AGILE’06), pp. 221-231. July 2006.

  • [KAH] T. Kahkonen. “Agile Methods for Large Organizations – Building Communities of Practice.” In Proceedings of the Agile Development Conference (ADC 2004), pp. 2-11. June 2004.

  • [KOP] T. Koponen. “Evaluation Framework for Open Source Software Maintenance.” In Proceedings on Software Engineering Advances (ICSEA’06), pp. 52. October 2006.

  • [MAK] P. Maki-Asiala, M. Matinlassi. “Quality Assurance of Open Source Components: Integrator Point of View.” In Proceedings of the Thirtieth Annual International Computer Software and Applications Conference (COMPSAC’06), pp. 189-194. September 2006.