This is one approach that could work -- identify exemplar records and run tests adapted from the unit tests against the locally installed stylesheets. I guess my question would be, if the static data used by the unit tests are bad, why not just update the data and fix the test, rather than duplicating the test with minor revisions against better data? I'm not seeing the tests in the sample as more sophisticated than the existing unit tests, but I could be missing something.
Another approach would be to use an API testing tool (e.g. Postman) to run against a targeted Metaproxy installation to verify that a particular issue is resolved in a particular installation. If the goal is to produce a test suite that can be run after a new version of marc2bibframe2 is installed on a Metaproxy server, this would be a better approach, I think.
@kirkhess -- let me know what you think. In the meantime, I'll put together a few tests to run in newman as a PoC.
Sample test from @kirkhess: live.xspec.txt
This is one approach that could work -- identify exemplar records and run tests adapted from the unit tests against the locally installed stylesheets. I guess my question would be, if the static data used by the unit tests are bad, why not just update the data and fix the test, rather than duplicating the test with minor revisions against better data? I'm not seeing the tests in the sample as more sophisticated than the existing unit tests, but I could be missing something.
Another approach would be to use an API testing tool (e.g. Postman) to run against a targeted Metaproxy installation to verify that a particular issue is resolved in a particular installation. If the goal is to produce a test suite that can be run after a new version of marc2bibframe2 is installed on a Metaproxy server, this would be a better approach, I think.
@kirkhess -- let me know what you think. In the meantime, I'll put together a few tests to run in newman as a PoC.