Extract fixtures into separate classes

[localheinz]

This PR

• extracts fixtures into separate classes and introduces a new PSR-4 class mapping

💁‍♂️ There is a range of test classes in tests/Faker. Some of the files declare additional classes in the containing files.

The first impulse would be to move them into separate files, declaring a single class in each file. The question that arises then is: where to put these classes?

We use Faker\Test as namespace for tests. We could

• declare test doubles in Faker\Test\Double
• declare fixtures in Faker\Test\Fixture
• declare integration tests in Faker\Test\Integration
• declare unit tests in Faker\Test\Unit

This could nicely map to the following directory structure:

test
├── Double
├── Fixture
├── Integration
└── Unit

However, we currently autoload classes from the Faker\Test namespace using a PSR-4 autoloader with PSR-0 class mapping with the following directory structure:

test
└── Faker

We could move classes into the following structure:

test
└── Faker
    ├── Double
    ├── Fixture
    ├── Integration
    └── Unit

but then these classes would mix with existing classes.

We could move existing classes from test/Faker/ to test/, effectively flattening the directory structure. People often complain that this will make history hard to understand or follow (I don't care much). Since a lot of classes will be removed or extracted into separate packages, these tests will disappear sooner or later, too.

That's why I propose to keep the old tests and add new tests in a separate structure:

test
├── Double
├── Faker
├── Fixture
├── Integration
└── Unit

We could then easily differentiate between kinds of tests, in particular, tests that demonstrate the behaviour from the outside as expected from users (also see #233), and others, that test specifics of extensions and similar.

Eventually, we could remove the directory test/Faker.

What do you think?

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Merging #234 (0d4b706) into main (3d69b4d) will not change coverage.
The diff coverage is n/a.

@@            Coverage Diff            @@
##               main     #234   +/-   ##
=========================================
  Coverage     58.07%   58.07%           
  Complexity     2044     2044           
=========================================
  Files           315      315           
  Lines          5104     5104           
=========================================
  Hits           2964     2964           
  Misses         2140     2140           

---

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 3d69b4d...86ebdd0. Read the comment docs.

[Nyholm]

I like this PR. Does it make sense to leave all/most of the current code as is, and then when we move to extensions, we just copy the tests we like. Eventually we remove the legacy tests.

[pimjansen]

Yeah agree on the approach

[pimjansen]

@localheinz will you make a first setup of this or should some of us support you with anything here?

[stale]

This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed after 1 week if no further activity occurs. Thank you for your contributions.

[localheinz]

@pimjansen

Needs a review!

🤓

[GrahamCampbell]

Looks fine. Advantage is that we are actually following psr-4 now... :P

[pimjansen]

Lgtm

[localheinz]

Thank you, @GrahamCampbell, @Nyholm, and @pimjansen!