Re: ActivityPub Test Suite?

Given that the old test suite seems to have met its demise, I wonder if we
might take a different approach in building a new one...

Rather than hand-coding a new test suite, with multiple versions for each
language, it might make sense to try to automatically generate as much of
the testing code as possible. Doing this could be done by leveraging the
work of the OpenAPI initiative <https://www.openapis.org/> and tools like
the Swagger
<https://editor.swagger.io/?_ga=2.197021994.763649015.1679684294-619748424.1679684294>
editor,
which are able to translate OpenAPI specifications into a large variety of
languages while also automatically generating documentation in
language-specific formats. If we were to do this, we'd not only make it
easier to produce test-suites, but also make it much easier for new
implementers to learn the APIs and get an understanding of how they are
expected to work.

   - Is there a "better" executable HTTP specification language than
   that offered by OpenAPI?
   - Are there any useful test suite generators that could be used to
   reduce the cost of test-suite development?
   - Are there tools better than those provided by Swagger
   <https://swagger.io/> for addressing this range of needs?

bob wyman


On Fri, Mar 24, 2023 at 2:16 PM Bob Wyman <bob@wyman.us> wrote:

> The ActivityPub spec says there is supposed to be a test suite at:
> https://test.activitypub.rocks/ However, that is no longer the case.
>
>    - Does the test suite still exist? If so, where is it?
>    - Is/Was the test suite's coverage, effectiveness, operation, etc.
>    satisfactory? If not, why not?
>    - Would it be useful to either improve or replace the old test suite?
>    If so, in what ways?
>    - Implementation reports, based on the old test suite are provided at:
>    https://activitypub.rocks/implementation-report/ . Should this list,
>    or a copy, be maintained within the SWICG GitHub repository? If not, why
>    not?
>    - Was there ever a test suite for ActivityStreams?
>    - Is anyone willing to work on developing a new/improved AP test suite?
>    - If a new or improved test suite were to be developed, what
>    non-obvious requirements should it satisfy?
>
> bob wyman
>
>