Download JAR files tagged by which with all dependencies

# Pact Spring/JUnit5 Support This module extends the base [Pact JUnit5 module](../pact-jvm-provider-junit5). See that for more details. For writing Spring Pact verification tests with JUnit 5, there is an JUnit 5 Invocation Context Provider that you can use with the `@TestTemplate` annotation. This will generate a test for each interaction found for the pact files for the provider. To use it, add the `@Provider` and `@ExtendWith(SpringExtension.class)` and one of the pact source annotations to your test class (as per a JUnit 5 test), then add a method annotated with `@TestTemplate` and `@ExtendWith(PactVerificationSpringProvider.class)` that takes a `PactVerificationContext` parameter. You will need to call `verifyInteraction()` on the context parameter in your test template method. For example: ```java @ExtendWith(SpringExtension.class) @SpringBootTest(webEnvironment = SpringBootTest.WebEnvironment.DEFINED_PORT) @Provider("Animal Profile Service") @PactBroker public class ContractVerificationTest { @TestTemplate @ExtendWith(PactVerificationSpringProvider.class) void pactVerificationTestTemplate(PactVerificationContext context) { context.verifyInteraction(); } } ``` You will now be able to setup all the required properties using the Spring context, e.g. creating an application YAML file in the test resources: ```yaml pactbroker: host: your.broker.host auth: username: broker-user password: broker.password ``` You can also run pact tests against `MockMvc` without need to spin up the whole application context which takes time and often requires more additional setup (e.g. database). In order to run lightweight tests just use `@WebMvcTest` from Spring and `MockMvcTestTarget` as a test target before each test. For example: ```java @WebMvcTest @Provider("myAwesomeService") @PactBroker class ContractVerificationTest { @Autowired private MockMvc mockMvc; @TestTemplate @ExtendWith(PactVerificationInvocationContextProvider.class) void pactVerificationTestTemplate(PactVerificationContext context) { context.verifyInteraction(); } @BeforeEach void before(PactVerificationContext context) { context.setTarget(new MockMvcTestTarget(mockMvc)); } } ``` You can also use `MockMvcTestTarget` for tests without spring context by providing the controllers manually. For example: ```java @Provider("myAwesomeService") @PactFolder("pacts") class MockMvcTestTargetStandaloneMockMvcTestJava { @TestTemplate @ExtendWith(PactVerificationInvocationContextProvider.class) void pactVerificationTestTemplate(PactVerificationContext context) { context.verifyInteraction(); } @BeforeEach void before(PactVerificationContext context) { MockMvcTestTarget testTarget = new MockMvcTestTarget(); testTarget.setControllers(new DataResource()); context.setTarget(testTarget); } @RestController static class DataResource { @GetMapping("/data") @ResponseStatus(HttpStatus.NO_CONTENT) void getData(@RequestParam("ticketId") String ticketId) { } } } ``` **Important:** Since `@WebMvcTest` starts only Spring MVC components you can't use `PactVerificationSpringProvider` and need to fallback to `PactVerificationInvocationContextProvider`

Jsgen is a Java Source Generation Framework: That means, it should be a valuable tool, if you intend to write a custom generator for Java sources. As such, it is the successor of a previous framework, called JaxMeJS (http://jaxme.sourceforge.net/JaxMeJS/docs/index.html). The predecessor came into being as a standalone project. It was incorporated into the bigger JaxMe project, when the latter was adopted by the Apache Webservices project. And it was buried as part of the bigger project, when the latter was moved to the Apache Attic (http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/webservices/archive/jaxme/). That was fine for quite some time, because the latest released version (JaxMeJS 0.5.2) did its job quite well. Over the years, however, the Java language has evolved, and the lack of support for features like Generics, or Annotations, became a burden. Hence the Successor: Jsgen picks up, where JaxMeJS ended. It is, however, a complete rewrite with several additional features, that the author considers to be important for modern Java applications: 1. It supports Generics. 2. It supports Annotations. 3. The builder pattern has been adopted. Almost all important classes are implemented as builders. This should make writing the actual source generators much more concise, and maintainable, than it used to be before. 4. The code style is configurable. Code styles allow you to concentrate on the actual work. The resulting Jave source will look nicely formatted, anyways. As of this writing, you can select between two builtin code styles: - The default code style is basically the authors personal free style, roughly comparable to the default code style of the Eclipse Java IDE. - As an alternative, there is also a Maven code style, which is widely used in the Open Source communities. Compared to the default style, it is less concise, if not even a bit verbose. On the other hand, it is widely adopted by projects in the vicinity of {{{https://maven.apache.org}Apache Maven}}. 5. Import lists are created, and sorted, automatically.

HockeySDK-Android implements support for using HockeyApp in your Android application. The following features are currently supported: Collect crash reports:If your app crashes, a crash log is written to the device's storage. If the user starts the app again, they will be asked asked to submit the crash report to HockeyApp. This works for both beta and live apps, i.e. those submitted to Google Play or other app stores. Crash logs contain viable information for you to help resolve the issue. Furthermore, you as a developer can add additional information to the report as well. Update Alpha/Beta apps: The app will check with HockeyApp if a new version for your alpha/beta build is available. If yes, it will show a dialog to users and let them see the release notes, the version history and start the installation process right away. You can even force the installation of certain updates. User Metrics: Understand user behavior to improve your app. Track usage through daily and monthly active users. Monitor crash impacted users. Measure customer engagement through session count. Add custom tracking calls to learn which features your users are actually using. This feature requires a minimum API level of 14 (Android 4.x Ice Cream Sandwich). Feedback: Besides crash reports, collecting feedback from your users from within your app is a great option to help with improving your app. You act on and answer feedback directly from the HockeyApp backend. Authenticate: Identify and authenticate users against your registered testers with the HockeyApp backend.

# Pact Junit 5 Extension ## Overview For writing Pact verification tests with JUnit 5, there is an JUnit 5 Invocation Context Provider that you can use with the `@TestTemplate` annotation. This will generate a test for each interaction found for the pact files for the provider. To use it, add the `@Provider` and one of the pact source annotations to your test class (as per a JUnit 4 test), then add a method annotated with `@TestTemplate` and `@ExtendWith(PactVerificationInvocationContextProvider.class)` that takes a `PactVerificationContext` parameter. You will need to call `verifyInteraction()` on the context parameter in your test template method. For example: ```java @Provider("myAwesomeService") @PactFolder("pacts") public class ContractVerificationTest { @TestTemplate @ExtendWith(PactVerificationInvocationContextProvider.class) void pactVerificationTestTemplate(PactVerificationContext context) { context.verifyInteraction(); } } ``` For details on the provider and pact source annotations, refer to the [Pact junit runner](../pact-jvm-provider-junit/README.md) docs. ## Test target You can set the test target (the object that defines the target of the test, which should point to your provider) on the `PactVerificationContext`, but you need to do this in a before test method (annotated with `@BeforeEach`). There are three different test targets you can use: `HttpTestTarget`, `HttpsTestTarget` and `AmpqTestTarget`. For example: ```java @BeforeEach void before(PactVerificationContext context) { context.setTarget(HttpTestTarget.fromUrl(new URL(myProviderUrl))); // or something like // context.setTarget(new HttpTestTarget("localhost", myProviderPort, "/")); } ``` ## Provider State Methods Provider State Methods work in the same way as with JUnit 4 tests, refer to the [Pact junit runner](../pact-jvm-provider-junit/README.md) docs. ## Modifying the requests before they are sent **Important Note:** You should only use this feature for things that can not be persisted in the pact file. By modifying the request, you are potentially modifying the contract from the consumer tests! Sometimes you may need to add things to the requests that can't be persisted in a pact file. Examples of these would be authentication tokens, which have a small life span. The Http and Https test targets support injecting the request that will executed into the test template method. You can then add things to the request before calling the `verifyInteraction()` method. For example to add a header: ```java @TestTemplate @ExtendWith(PactVerificationInvocationContextProvider.class) void testTemplate(PactVerificationContext context, HttpRequest request) { // This will add a header to the request request.addHeader("X-Auth-Token", "1234"); context.verifyInteraction(); } ``` ## Objects that can be injected into the test methods You can inject the following objects into your test methods (just like the `PactVerificationContext`). They will be null if injected before the supported phase. | Object | Can be injected from phase | Description | | ------ | --------------- | ----------- | | PactVerificationContext | @BeforeEach | The context to use to execute the interaction test | | Pact | any | The Pact model for the test | | Interaction | any | The Interaction model for the test | | HttpRequest | @TestTemplate | The request that is going to be executed (only for HTTP and HTTPS targets) | | ProviderVerifier | @TestTemplate | The verifier instance that is used to verify the interaction |

The OODT grid services (product and profile services) use CORBA or RMI as their underlying network transport. However, limitations of CORBA and RMI make them inappropriate for large-scale deployments. For one, both are procedural mechanisms, providing a remote interface that resembles a method call. This makes streaming of data from a service impossible, because there are limitations to the sizes of data structures that can be passed over a remote method call. Instead, repeated calls must be made to retrieve each block of a product, making transfer speeds horribly slow compared to HTTP or FTP. (Block-based retrieval of profiles was never implemented, resulting in out of memory conditions for large profile results, which is another problem.) Second, both CORBA and RMI rely on a central name registry. The registry makes an object independent of its network location, enabling a client to call it by name (looking up its last known location in the registry). However, this requires that server objects be able to make outbound network calls to the registry (through any outbound firewall), and that the registry accept those registrations (through any inbound firewall). This required administrative action at institutions hosting server objects and at the institution hosting the registry. Often, these firewall exceptions would change without notice as system adminstrators changed at each location (apparently firewall exceptions are poorly documented everywhere). Further, in the two major deployments of OODT (PDS and EDRN), server objects have almost never moved, nullifying any benefit of the registry. This project, OODT Web Grid Services, avoids the prolems of CORBA and RMI by using HTTP as the transport mechanism for products and profiles. Further, it provides a password-protected mechanism to add new sets of product and profile query handlers, enabling seamless activation of additional capabilities.

Axis2 is an effort to re-design and totally re-implement both Axis/Java and (eventually) Axis/C++ on a new architecture. Evolving from the now standard "handler chain" model which Axis1 pioneered, Axis2 is developing a more flexible pipeline architecture which can yet be managed and packaged in a more organized manner. This new design acknowledges the maturing of the Web services space in terms of new protocols such as WS-ReliableMessaging, WS-Security and WS-Addressing that are built on top of the base SOAP system. At the time Axis1 was designed, while it was fully expected that other protocols such as WS-ReliableMessaging would be built on top of it, there was not a proper extension architecture defined to enable clean composition of such layers. Thus, one of the key motivations for Axis2 is to provide a clean and simple environment for like Apache Sandesha and Apache WSS4J to layer on top of the base SOAP system. Another driving force for Axis2 as well as the move away from RPC oriented Web services towards more document-oriented, message style asynchronous service interactions. The Axis2 project is centered on a new representation for SOAP messages called AXIOM (AXIs Object Model). AXIOM consists of two parts: a complete XML Infoset representation and a SOAP Infoset representation on top of that. The XML Infoset representation provides a JDOM-like simple API but is built on a deferred model via a StAX-based (Streaming API for XML) pull parsing API. A key feature of AXIOM is that it allows one to stop building the XML tree and just access the pull stream directly; thus enabling both maximum flexibility and maximum performance. This approach allows us to support multiple levels of abstraction for consuming and offering Web services: using plain AXIOM, using generated code and statically data-bound data types and so on. At the time of Axis1's design, RPC-style, synchronous, request-response interactions were the order of the day for Web services. Today service interactions are much more message -oriented and exploit many different message exchange patterns. The Axis2 engine architecture is careful to not build in any assumptions of request-response patterns to ensure that it can be used easily to support arbitrary message exchange patterns.

This is the main aggregator for all gwt submodules. All gwt-specific code resides here. Submodules should avoid inheriting from each other unless necessary. This goes for maven structure and gwt.xml structure. The super module is where our jre emulation layer and super-source live; all modules should inherit super, and a minimum of other modules. Some modules, like injection, are fulfilling an api in the core module, and should be accessed only through core service interfaces. Other modules, like reflection, are capable of being standalone inherits, but can benefit from core utilities like injection, so, two (or more) .gwt.xml modules may be provided. As XApi nears 1.0, all submodules will be routinely stitched together into an uber-jar, in order to have a single jar with a single gwt module that can provide all of the services at once. Internal projects will never use the uber jar, to help maintain modularity, but external projects that want to use more than one service will certainly prefer inheriting one artifact, instead of twelve. When distributed in uber-jar format, it will likely be necessary for either the uber jar, or just xapi-gwt-api.jar to appear before gwt-dev on your compile-time classpath. If using gwt-maven-plugin, the gwtFirstOnClasspath option may become problematic. If so, we will provide a forked gwt-plugin to make sure our compiler enhancements are included in the build process. There is also work going on to make a super-source-everything plugin, which will use maven to find source files, and generate synthetic .gwt.xml for you, as part of an effort to create a wholly unified programming environment. In addition to java-to-javascript, we intend to compile java-to-java and possibly other languages, like go; imagine implementing gwt deferred binding to eliminate cross-platform differences between server environments, or operating systems, or versions of a platform, or anywhere else a core api needs to bind to multiple implementations, depending on the runtime environment.

BEhavioural Agents Simple Testing Tool - BEAST Tool The aim of this project is the development of a system which allows Behavior Driven Development (BDD) in Multi-Agent Systems (MAS), to make testing practices more accessible and intuitive to everybody. In one hand, in order to let tests be writable by newcomers and experts alike, system must allow the redaction of tests in plain text, because client does not need to have knowledge of our code. This plain text will be traduced to software later. The definition of test will be realized with the terminology Given-When-Then, which allows trace an easy guide of the behavior of a given scenario when something happened. In the other hand, due to the complexity of MAS, making unit testing of an agent that needs the interaction with others is almost impossible until the whole system is finished. This implies to leave testing issues to the end of the project, generating big troubles in case of malfunction. Consequently, its necessary to carry out a tool to allow the creation of mock agents and to perform tests during the whole development process. Therefore another objective of our systems is to include a mocking tool which permits testing continuously. Definitively, our tool allows the testing of any MAS in the development process, increasing its modularity and decreasing its elaboration and testing cost. These tests will be written in plain text so that anyone would be able to understand them. For further reading, a paper published in ITMAS2012 workshop can be found in: http://scholar.google.es/citations?view_op=view_citation&hl=es&user=mT3KgXUAAAAJ&citation_for_view=mT3KgXUAAAAJ:Tyk-4Ss8FVUC