<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!-- generator="wordpress/2.0.2" -->
<rss version="2.0" 
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: soapUI vs. JUnit</title>
	<link>http://myarch.com/soapui-vs-junit</link>
	<description>Builds and bytes</description>
	<pubDate>Thu, 28 Aug 2008 08:02:47 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.0.2</generator>

	<item>
		<title>by: sure</title>
		<link>http://myarch.com/soapui-vs-junit#comment-26119</link>
		<pubDate>Thu, 17 Apr 2008 05:16:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://myarch.com/soapui-vs-junit#comment-26119</guid>
					<description>Hi,

     I am new to this tool, Can any one help me how to test webservice using this tool,</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi,</p>
<p>     I am new to this tool, Can any one help me how to test webservice using this tool,
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Alexander Ananiev</title>
		<link>http://myarch.com/soapui-vs-junit#comment-7904</link>
		<pubDate>Wed, 02 May 2007 14:28:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://myarch.com/soapui-vs-junit#comment-7904</guid>
					<description>Ole, I agree with you on #2 in that typically service consumers would be using different types of Web services platforms, not just JAX-WS (otherwise, what would be the point of using Web services in the first place). However, from my experience, in a corporate environment (Internet is a totally different matter) these technologies are limited to mostly different flavors of Java and .NET and so there are not that many permutations that would have to be tested using XUnit approach. 

On #3, I actually think that generating JUnit stubs from soapUI would somewhat defeat the purpose of developing JUnit classes, which is to allow service providers to perform all the steps that service consumers would have to go through in order to consume a service. And I'm pretty sure that you already have enough on your plate with all the other work on soapUI :)

Thanks for the great tool, 
Alexander</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Ole, I agree with you on #2 in that typically service consumers would be using different types of Web services platforms, not just JAX-WS (otherwise, what would be the point of using Web services in the first place). However, from my experience, in a corporate environment (Internet is a totally different matter) these technologies are limited to mostly different flavors of Java and .NET and so there are not that many permutations that would have to be tested using XUnit approach. </p>
<p>On #3, I actually think that generating JUnit stubs from soapUI would somewhat defeat the purpose of developing JUnit classes, which is to allow service providers to perform all the steps that service consumers would have to go through in order to consume a service. And I&#8217;m pretty sure that you already have enough on your plate with all the other work on soapUI :)</p>
<p>Thanks for the great tool,<br />
Alexander
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Ole Matzura</title>
		<link>http://myarch.com/soapui-vs-junit#comment-7892</link>
		<pubDate>Tue, 01 May 2007 11:43:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://myarch.com/soapui-vs-junit#comment-7892</guid>
					<description>Hi,

nice post! I would like to add some more twists:

1) Using a tool like soapUI is mainly for testing the actual server-side web service implementation, and does give some possibilities that are not available (or at least not easy) in JAX-WS; 
- sending of invalid messages (both syntactically and structurally) which is usefull for testing server-side error handling,  
- sending of messages using standards not supported by JAX-WS (much of the WS-XXX soup)
 
2) Often when developing web services, you have little control of the actual client technology used on &quot;the other side&quot;, thus providing examples based on JUnit/JAX-WS could be rather limited as there are so many more technologies in use for accessing web services (but of course its better than no examples at all). 
-&amp;#62; We have actually had several soapUI users that provide comprehensive soapUI projects together with their web services, since it is a great way of giving a &quot;platform-neutral&quot; example of how the web service is supposed to work. Sometimes they also include a complete Mock Implementation of the web service in soapUI, which allows their client to build/test client code without having access to the actual live service

3)  Anyhow, using JUnit as you describe is a great complement and as you say gives an insight in how the web service may be &quot;perceived&quot; by the client. Maybe we could add support for generating stubs for these kinds of JUnit testcases for JAX-WS from within soapUI? 

rock on!

kind regards,

/Ole
eviware.com</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi,</p>
<p>nice post! I would like to add some more twists:</p>
<p>1) Using a tool like soapUI is mainly for testing the actual server-side web service implementation, and does give some possibilities that are not available (or at least not easy) in JAX-WS;<br />
- sending of invalid messages (both syntactically and structurally) which is usefull for testing server-side error handling,<br />
- sending of messages using standards not supported by JAX-WS (much of the WS-XXX soup)</p>
<p>2) Often when developing web services, you have little control of the actual client technology used on &#8220;the other side&#8221;, thus providing examples based on JUnit/JAX-WS could be rather limited as there are so many more technologies in use for accessing web services (but of course its better than no examples at all).<br />
-&gt; We have actually had several soapUI users that provide comprehensive soapUI projects together with their web services, since it is a great way of giving a &#8220;platform-neutral&#8221; example of how the web service is supposed to work. Sometimes they also include a complete Mock Implementation of the web service in soapUI, which allows their client to build/test client code without having access to the actual live service</p>
<p>3)  Anyhow, using JUnit as you describe is a great complement and as you say gives an insight in how the web service may be &#8220;perceived&#8221; by the client. Maybe we could add support for generating stubs for these kinds of JUnit testcases for JAX-WS from within soapUI? </p>
<p>rock on!</p>
<p>kind regards,</p>
<p>/Ole<br />
eviware.com
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: jon</title>
		<link>http://myarch.com/soapui-vs-junit#comment-7879</link>
		<pubDate>Mon, 30 Apr 2007 18:21:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://myarch.com/soapui-vs-junit#comment-7879</guid>
					<description>Excellent points!  I enjoy your blog immensely.  Keep up the great work!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Excellent points!  I enjoy your blog immensely.  Keep up the great work!
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
</channel>
</rss>
