NFD

It seems you're talking about the file name here. What about the actual test suite name as passed to boost macros?

For the test suite name, we have been consistently using <Folder><Module>. I would like to keep this part as is (.t suffix should not be part of the name). For example, for src/encoding/encoder.hpp|cpp module, there should be tests/.../encoding/encoder.t.cpp and suite name EncodingEncoder.

Alternatively, we could do some nesting with suite names. In other words, for every folder, we create a separate test suite. For the same example, there will be suite name Encoding with sub-suite Encoder. Boost is very happy with suites spreaded across multiple files (they are namespaces).

One more thing that I started to add in test cases is enclosing test suites into additional "tests" namespace. Though this doesn't relate to naming conventions.

I have no objections. Just to summarize:

• for src/module-name.hpp

  • Filename for tests: tests/.../module-name.t.cpp (... is unit-tests, integration-tests, or something else project-specific)
  • Name of the suite TestModuleName
  • Inside the same namespace as src/module-name.hpp plus inside additional tests namespace. If needed, parent tests namespaces can be imported using using namespace xxx::tests directive

• for src/folder/module-name.hpp

  • Filename for tests: tests/.../folder/module-name.t.cpp
  • Name of the suite FolderModuleName
  • Inside the same namespace as src/folder/module-name.hpp plus inside additional tests namespace. If needed, parent tests namespaces can be imported using using namespace xxx::tests directive

I agree with note-5. This Task, once assigned, should update UnitTesting wiki page.

Are we going to mass rename the test files in one go or do it incrementally?

Which way you prefer?

I would do mass update in ndn-cxx, as naming there is a little messy now. For nfd we could do incremental or mass update, I have no strong opinion on that.

I don't mind either way. If you just do a mechanical mass rename with git (git mv), it should be straightforward to rebase existing commits as git should be able to resolve the conflicts automatically.

I can take over code updates

In ndn-cxx:commit:bae21d51840dbcee046ed67a7337db68d823971e, test suite for ndn::security::transform::Base64Decode is being nested like:

BOOST_AUTO_TEST_SUITE(Security)
BOOST_AUTO_TEST_SUITE(TransformBase64Decode)

The idea could be correct, but this violates the convention set here.

We need to re-discuss the convention.

20150901 conference call decides to change the convention to UnitTesting rev6.

Existing test suites may retain their current names, but new test suites should follow the new convention.