You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@pig.apache.org by Benjamin Reed <br...@yahoo-inc.com> on 2008/04/01 23:32:05 UTC
JUNIT 3 vs 4
Charlie made some good points about our use of JUnit 4 annotations in our code
versus our use of JUnit 3. Is there a reason we are not using JUnit 4? Does
it not work on the Mac?
ben
RE: JUNIT 3 vs 4
Posted by Olga Natkovich <ol...@yahoo-inc.com>.
The machine that I am using for build has ant 1.6.5. I see that some
other machines have 1.7. So it might be distributed wide enough. One
thing we could do is to agree to move to 1.7 and then give people some
time to upgrade. For now, I am fine with cleaning up the existing code
if anybody is interested in taking that task.
Olga
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Charlie Groves [mailto:charlie@threerings.net]
> Sent: Tuesday, April 01, 2008 4:06 PM
> To: pig-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: Re: JUNIT 3 vs 4
>
> Right, I was only hoping that we'd pick one and stick to it.
> Having a mix of nonfunctional JUnit 4 annotations in with
> JUnit 3 tests is just confusing.
>
> Moving to JUnit 4 requires Ant 1.7 which has been out since
> December 2006. The fact that Olga doesn't have it makes me
> feel like it hasn't spread enough to be worth switching to,
> so I'd be happy if we just got rid of the JUnit 4 annotations.
>
> Charlie
>
> On Apr 1, 2008, at 2:37 PM, Olga Natkovich wrote:
> > According to Charlie, it means that everybody would also need to
> > upgrade ant to the version that support JUnit 4
> >
> > Olga
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Benjamin Reed [mailto:breed@yahoo-inc.com]
> >> Sent: Tuesday, April 01, 2008 2:32 PM
> >> To: pig-dev@incubator.apache.org
> >> Subject: JUNIT 3 vs 4
> >>
> >> Charlie made some good points about our use of JUnit 4
> annotations in
> >> our code versus our use of JUnit 3. Is there a reason we are not
> >> using JUnit 4? Does it not work on the Mac?
> >>
> >> ben
> >>
> >
>
>
Re: JUNIT 3 vs 4
Posted by Charlie Groves <ch...@threerings.net>.
Right, I was only hoping that we'd pick one and stick to it. Having a
mix of nonfunctional JUnit 4 annotations in with JUnit 3 tests is just
confusing.
Moving to JUnit 4 requires Ant 1.7 which has been out since December
2006. The fact that Olga doesn't have it makes me feel like it hasn't
spread enough to be worth switching to, so I'd be happy if we just got
rid of the JUnit 4 annotations.
Charlie
On Apr 1, 2008, at 2:37 PM, Olga Natkovich wrote:
> According to Charlie, it means that everybody would also need to
> upgrade
> ant to the version that support JUnit 4
>
> Olga
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Benjamin Reed [mailto:breed@yahoo-inc.com]
>> Sent: Tuesday, April 01, 2008 2:32 PM
>> To: pig-dev@incubator.apache.org
>> Subject: JUNIT 3 vs 4
>>
>> Charlie made some good points about our use of JUnit 4
>> annotations in our code versus our use of JUnit 3. Is there a
>> reason we are not using JUnit 4? Does it not work on the Mac?
>>
>> ben
>>
>
RE: JUNIT 3 vs 4
Posted by Olga Natkovich <ol...@yahoo-inc.com>.
According to Charlie, it means that everybody would also need to upgrade
ant to the version that support JUnit 4
Olga
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Benjamin Reed [mailto:breed@yahoo-inc.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, April 01, 2008 2:32 PM
> To: pig-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: JUNIT 3 vs 4
>
> Charlie made some good points about our use of JUnit 4
> annotations in our code versus our use of JUnit 3. Is there a
> reason we are not using JUnit 4? Does it not work on the Mac?
>
> ben
>