You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@maven.apache.org by Benedikt Ritter <br...@apache.org> on 2016/10/03 17:38:12 UTC
[SUREFIRE] JUnit 5 support - how to move things forward?
Hi,
now that we have a separate branch for the JUnit 5 support in the surefire
repo, I'm asking myself how to much things forward. I've added some
additional IT implementations in my GitHub fork, but they all fail because
the 5.0.0-M2 release of junit-surefire-provider does not implement the
desired features.
At this point I'm pretty much blocked: I can not pick up the latest changes
to the JUnit 5 provider, because the JUnit team has not released it. The
JUnit team does not push the development of the provider further, since
they don't have integration tests...
Right now I think it would be best to start implementing a JUnit 5 provider
ourself in the junit5 branch, so we can add the missing features and have
it ready when JUnit 5 reaches GA.
Thoughts?
Benedikt
Re: [SUREFIRE] Parameterized Tests for Junit 4 and Junit 5? (Was:
[SUREFIRE] JUnit 5 support - how to move things forward?)
Posted by Benedikt Ritter <br...@apache.org>.
Hello Tibor,
I've played around a bit with the idea and I think there is a problem:
If you want to compile and run test using JUnit 4 annotations using JUnit
5, you need the vintage enigne in your dependencies. Otherwise you get
compile errors, because neither jupiter engine nor jupiter api ship the old
annotations. So I end up with a dependency declaration like this:
<dependencies>
<dependency>
<groupId>org.junit.jupiter</groupId>
<artifactId>junit-jupiter-engine</artifactId>
<version>${junit.jupiter.version}</version>
<scope>test</scope>
</dependency>
<!-- Needed because otherwise test won't compile because @Test is missing -->
<dependency>
<groupId>org.junit.vintage</groupId>
<artifactId>junit-vintage-engine</artifactId>
<version>${junit.vintage.version}</version>
<scope>test</scope>
</dependency>
</dependencies>
This will cause JUnit 5 to execute everything on the vintage engine. If we
want to share test code across JUnit versions, I need to also add the
jupiter API annotations to the test code. But I still need the vintage
engine in order to get it to compile.
Now I have a test like:
public class MixedTest
{
@org.junit.Test
@org.junit.api.jupiter.Test
public test()
{
// do something
}
}
Which engine will execute the test? No one knows... So I don't think it's a
good idea to share test classes.
Regards,
Benedikt
Benedikt Ritter <br...@apache.org> schrieb am So., 9. Okt. 2016 um
14:25 Uhr:
> Hello Tibor,
>
> I think I understand what you're thinking of. I'll give it a try and see
> if I can come up with something useful :-)
>
> Regards,
> Benedikt
>
>
> Tibor Digana <ti...@googlemail.com> schrieb am Mi., 5. Okt. 2016
> um 00:18 Uhr:
>
> Instead of using <classpathDependencyExcludes/> in Surefire (may affect the
> ITs), there is a better trick.
> See the POM surefire-junit47.
> You will see the section of compiler endorsed classpath but Surefire has
> different one:
>
>
>
> <plugin>
> <artifactId>maven-dependency-plugin</artifactId>
> <executions>
> <execution>
> <id>main</id>
> <phase>process-sources</phase>
> <goals>
> <goal>copy</goal>
> </goals>
> <configuration>
>
> <outputDirectory>${project.build.directory}/endorsed</outputDirectory>
> <overWriteIfNewer>false</overWriteIfNewer>
> <silent>true</silent>
> <artifactItems>
> <artifactItem>
> <groupId>junit</groupId>
> <artifactId>junit</artifactId>
> <version>4.7</version>
> <type>jar</type>
> </artifactItem>
> </artifactItems>
> </configuration>
> </execution>
> <execution>
> <id>test</id>
> <phase>process-sources</phase>
> <goals>
> <goal>copy</goal>
> </goals>
> <configuration>
>
> <outputDirectory>${project.build.directory}/endorsed-test</outputDirectory>
> <overWriteIfNewer>false</overWriteIfNewer>
> <silent>true</silent>
> <artifactItems>
> <artifactItem>
> <groupId>junit</groupId>
> <artifactId>junit</artifactId>
> <version>4.12</version>
> <type>jar</type>
> </artifactItem>
> </artifactItems>
> </configuration>
> </execution>
> </executions>
> </plugin>
> <plugin>
> <artifactId>maven-compiler-plugin</artifactId>
> <configuration>
> <compilerArguments>
> <endorseddirs>${project.build.directory}/endorsed</endorseddirs>
> </compilerArguments>
> <testCompilerArguments>
> <endorseddirs>${project.build.directory}/endorsed-test</endorseddirs>
> </testCompilerArguments>
> </configuration>
> </plugin>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Oct 4, 2016 at 7:47 PM, Benedikt Ritter <br...@apache.org>
> wrote:
>
> > Hello Tibor,
> >
> > Tibor Digana <ti...@googlemail.com> schrieb am Di., 4. Okt. 2016
> um
> > 02:29 Uhr:
> >
> > > Can you simplify and speed up writing integration tests in the way that
> > you
> > > would parameterize the existing JUnit 4 testing by adding Maven
> profiles
> > > (one default profile and junit5 profile) having another dependencies
> and
> > > @RunWith(Parameterized.class)?
> > > This would be cool because we can have identical assertion statements,
> > > means behavior, for multiple providers.
> > >
> >
> > I was already thinking about this, because right now I'm duplicating a
> lot
> > of the code from the ITs. This is definitely a good idea. But right know
> I
> > don't have a clear view of how we could implement that. Do we just share
> > the test class and work with separate test projects? Or do we want to
> even
> > share the test projects and work with profiles in the test project pom?
> >
> > JUnit 5 also has support for running legacy tests (they call it
> "vintage").
> > To make a complete IT suite, we would have to run all the JUnit 4 tests
> > against the JUnit 5 vintage engine as well.
> >
> > Lot a work ahead :-)
> >
> > Regards,
> > Benedikt
> >
> >
> > >
> > > On Mon, Oct 3, 2016 at 7:38 PM, Benedikt Ritter <br...@apache.org>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi,
> > > >
> > > > now that we have a separate branch for the JUnit 5 support in the
> > > surefire
> > > > repo, I'm asking myself how to much things forward. I've added some
> > > > additional IT implementations in my GitHub fork, but they all fail
> > > because
> > > > the 5.0.0-M2 release of junit-surefire-provider does not implement
> the
> > > > desired features.
> > > >
> > > > At this point I'm pretty much blocked: I can not pick up the latest
> > > changes
> > > > to the JUnit 5 provider, because the JUnit team has not released it.
> > The
> > > > JUnit team does not push the development of the provider further,
> since
> > > > they don't have integration tests...
> > > > Right now I think it would be best to start implementing a JUnit 5
> > > provider
> > > > ourself in the junit5 branch, so we can add the missing features and
> > have
> > > > it ready when JUnit 5 reaches GA.
> > > >
> > > > Thoughts?
> > > >
> > > > Benedikt
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Cheers
> > > Tibor
> > >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Cheers
> Tibor
>
>
Re: [SUREFIRE] Parameterized Tests for Junit 4 and Junit 5? (Was:
[SUREFIRE] JUnit 5 support - how to move things forward?)
Posted by Benedikt Ritter <br...@apache.org>.
Hello Tibor,
I think I understand what you're thinking of. I'll give it a try and see if
I can come up with something useful :-)
Regards,
Benedikt
Tibor Digana <ti...@googlemail.com> schrieb am Mi., 5. Okt. 2016 um
00:18 Uhr:
> Instead of using <classpathDependencyExcludes/> in Surefire (may affect the
> ITs), there is a better trick.
> See the POM surefire-junit47.
> You will see the section of compiler endorsed classpath but Surefire has
> different one:
>
>
>
> <plugin>
> <artifactId>maven-dependency-plugin</artifactId>
> <executions>
> <execution>
> <id>main</id>
> <phase>process-sources</phase>
> <goals>
> <goal>copy</goal>
> </goals>
> <configuration>
>
> <outputDirectory>${project.build.directory}/endorsed</outputDirectory>
> <overWriteIfNewer>false</overWriteIfNewer>
> <silent>true</silent>
> <artifactItems>
> <artifactItem>
> <groupId>junit</groupId>
> <artifactId>junit</artifactId>
> <version>4.7</version>
> <type>jar</type>
> </artifactItem>
> </artifactItems>
> </configuration>
> </execution>
> <execution>
> <id>test</id>
> <phase>process-sources</phase>
> <goals>
> <goal>copy</goal>
> </goals>
> <configuration>
>
> <outputDirectory>${project.build.directory}/endorsed-test</outputDirectory>
> <overWriteIfNewer>false</overWriteIfNewer>
> <silent>true</silent>
> <artifactItems>
> <artifactItem>
> <groupId>junit</groupId>
> <artifactId>junit</artifactId>
> <version>4.12</version>
> <type>jar</type>
> </artifactItem>
> </artifactItems>
> </configuration>
> </execution>
> </executions>
> </plugin>
> <plugin>
> <artifactId>maven-compiler-plugin</artifactId>
> <configuration>
> <compilerArguments>
> <endorseddirs>${project.build.directory}/endorsed</endorseddirs>
> </compilerArguments>
> <testCompilerArguments>
> <endorseddirs>${project.build.directory}/endorsed-test</endorseddirs>
> </testCompilerArguments>
> </configuration>
> </plugin>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Oct 4, 2016 at 7:47 PM, Benedikt Ritter <br...@apache.org>
> wrote:
>
> > Hello Tibor,
> >
> > Tibor Digana <ti...@googlemail.com> schrieb am Di., 4. Okt. 2016
> um
> > 02:29 Uhr:
> >
> > > Can you simplify and speed up writing integration tests in the way that
> > you
> > > would parameterize the existing JUnit 4 testing by adding Maven
> profiles
> > > (one default profile and junit5 profile) having another dependencies
> and
> > > @RunWith(Parameterized.class)?
> > > This would be cool because we can have identical assertion statements,
> > > means behavior, for multiple providers.
> > >
> >
> > I was already thinking about this, because right now I'm duplicating a
> lot
> > of the code from the ITs. This is definitely a good idea. But right know
> I
> > don't have a clear view of how we could implement that. Do we just share
> > the test class and work with separate test projects? Or do we want to
> even
> > share the test projects and work with profiles in the test project pom?
> >
> > JUnit 5 also has support for running legacy tests (they call it
> "vintage").
> > To make a complete IT suite, we would have to run all the JUnit 4 tests
> > against the JUnit 5 vintage engine as well.
> >
> > Lot a work ahead :-)
> >
> > Regards,
> > Benedikt
> >
> >
> > >
> > > On Mon, Oct 3, 2016 at 7:38 PM, Benedikt Ritter <br...@apache.org>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi,
> > > >
> > > > now that we have a separate branch for the JUnit 5 support in the
> > > surefire
> > > > repo, I'm asking myself how to much things forward. I've added some
> > > > additional IT implementations in my GitHub fork, but they all fail
> > > because
> > > > the 5.0.0-M2 release of junit-surefire-provider does not implement
> the
> > > > desired features.
> > > >
> > > > At this point I'm pretty much blocked: I can not pick up the latest
> > > changes
> > > > to the JUnit 5 provider, because the JUnit team has not released it.
> > The
> > > > JUnit team does not push the development of the provider further,
> since
> > > > they don't have integration tests...
> > > > Right now I think it would be best to start implementing a JUnit 5
> > > provider
> > > > ourself in the junit5 branch, so we can add the missing features and
> > have
> > > > it ready when JUnit 5 reaches GA.
> > > >
> > > > Thoughts?
> > > >
> > > > Benedikt
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Cheers
> > > Tibor
> > >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Cheers
> Tibor
>
Re: [SUREFIRE] Parameterized Tests for Junit 4 and Junit 5? (Was:
[SUREFIRE] JUnit 5 support - how to move things forward?)
Posted by Tibor Digana <ti...@googlemail.com>.
Instead of using <classpathDependencyExcludes/> in Surefire (may affect the
ITs), there is a better trick.
See the POM surefire-junit47.
You will see the section of compiler endorsed classpath but Surefire has
different one:
<plugin>
<artifactId>maven-dependency-plugin</artifactId>
<executions>
<execution>
<id>main</id>
<phase>process-sources</phase>
<goals>
<goal>copy</goal>
</goals>
<configuration>
<outputDirectory>${project.build.directory}/endorsed</outputDirectory>
<overWriteIfNewer>false</overWriteIfNewer>
<silent>true</silent>
<artifactItems>
<artifactItem>
<groupId>junit</groupId>
<artifactId>junit</artifactId>
<version>4.7</version>
<type>jar</type>
</artifactItem>
</artifactItems>
</configuration>
</execution>
<execution>
<id>test</id>
<phase>process-sources</phase>
<goals>
<goal>copy</goal>
</goals>
<configuration>
<outputDirectory>${project.build.directory}/endorsed-test</outputDirectory>
<overWriteIfNewer>false</overWriteIfNewer>
<silent>true</silent>
<artifactItems>
<artifactItem>
<groupId>junit</groupId>
<artifactId>junit</artifactId>
<version>4.12</version>
<type>jar</type>
</artifactItem>
</artifactItems>
</configuration>
</execution>
</executions>
</plugin>
<plugin>
<artifactId>maven-compiler-plugin</artifactId>
<configuration>
<compilerArguments>
<endorseddirs>${project.build.directory}/endorsed</endorseddirs>
</compilerArguments>
<testCompilerArguments>
<endorseddirs>${project.build.directory}/endorsed-test</endorseddirs>
</testCompilerArguments>
</configuration>
</plugin>
On Tue, Oct 4, 2016 at 7:47 PM, Benedikt Ritter <br...@apache.org> wrote:
> Hello Tibor,
>
> Tibor Digana <ti...@googlemail.com> schrieb am Di., 4. Okt. 2016 um
> 02:29 Uhr:
>
> > Can you simplify and speed up writing integration tests in the way that
> you
> > would parameterize the existing JUnit 4 testing by adding Maven profiles
> > (one default profile and junit5 profile) having another dependencies and
> > @RunWith(Parameterized.class)?
> > This would be cool because we can have identical assertion statements,
> > means behavior, for multiple providers.
> >
>
> I was already thinking about this, because right now I'm duplicating a lot
> of the code from the ITs. This is definitely a good idea. But right know I
> don't have a clear view of how we could implement that. Do we just share
> the test class and work with separate test projects? Or do we want to even
> share the test projects and work with profiles in the test project pom?
>
> JUnit 5 also has support for running legacy tests (they call it "vintage").
> To make a complete IT suite, we would have to run all the JUnit 4 tests
> against the JUnit 5 vintage engine as well.
>
> Lot a work ahead :-)
>
> Regards,
> Benedikt
>
>
> >
> > On Mon, Oct 3, 2016 at 7:38 PM, Benedikt Ritter <br...@apache.org>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > now that we have a separate branch for the JUnit 5 support in the
> > surefire
> > > repo, I'm asking myself how to much things forward. I've added some
> > > additional IT implementations in my GitHub fork, but they all fail
> > because
> > > the 5.0.0-M2 release of junit-surefire-provider does not implement the
> > > desired features.
> > >
> > > At this point I'm pretty much blocked: I can not pick up the latest
> > changes
> > > to the JUnit 5 provider, because the JUnit team has not released it.
> The
> > > JUnit team does not push the development of the provider further, since
> > > they don't have integration tests...
> > > Right now I think it would be best to start implementing a JUnit 5
> > provider
> > > ourself in the junit5 branch, so we can add the missing features and
> have
> > > it ready when JUnit 5 reaches GA.
> > >
> > > Thoughts?
> > >
> > > Benedikt
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Cheers
> > Tibor
> >
>
--
Cheers
Tibor
[SUREFIRE] Parameterized Tests for Junit 4 and Junit 5? (Was:
[SUREFIRE] JUnit 5 support - how to move things forward?)
Posted by Benedikt Ritter <br...@apache.org>.
Hello Tibor,
Tibor Digana <ti...@googlemail.com> schrieb am Di., 4. Okt. 2016 um
02:29 Uhr:
> Can you simplify and speed up writing integration tests in the way that you
> would parameterize the existing JUnit 4 testing by adding Maven profiles
> (one default profile and junit5 profile) having another dependencies and
> @RunWith(Parameterized.class)?
> This would be cool because we can have identical assertion statements,
> means behavior, for multiple providers.
>
I was already thinking about this, because right now I'm duplicating a lot
of the code from the ITs. This is definitely a good idea. But right know I
don't have a clear view of how we could implement that. Do we just share
the test class and work with separate test projects? Or do we want to even
share the test projects and work with profiles in the test project pom?
JUnit 5 also has support for running legacy tests (they call it "vintage").
To make a complete IT suite, we would have to run all the JUnit 4 tests
against the JUnit 5 vintage engine as well.
Lot a work ahead :-)
Regards,
Benedikt
>
> On Mon, Oct 3, 2016 at 7:38 PM, Benedikt Ritter <br...@apache.org>
> wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > now that we have a separate branch for the JUnit 5 support in the
> surefire
> > repo, I'm asking myself how to much things forward. I've added some
> > additional IT implementations in my GitHub fork, but they all fail
> because
> > the 5.0.0-M2 release of junit-surefire-provider does not implement the
> > desired features.
> >
> > At this point I'm pretty much blocked: I can not pick up the latest
> changes
> > to the JUnit 5 provider, because the JUnit team has not released it. The
> > JUnit team does not push the development of the provider further, since
> > they don't have integration tests...
> > Right now I think it would be best to start implementing a JUnit 5
> provider
> > ourself in the junit5 branch, so we can add the missing features and have
> > it ready when JUnit 5 reaches GA.
> >
> > Thoughts?
> >
> > Benedikt
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Cheers
> Tibor
>
Re: [SUREFIRE] JUnit 5 support - how to move things forward?
Posted by Tibor Digana <ti...@googlemail.com>.
Can you simplify and speed up writing integration tests in the way that you
would parameterize the existing JUnit 4 testing by adding Maven profiles
(one default profile and junit5 profile) having another dependencies and
@RunWith(Parameterized.class)?
This would be cool because we can have identical assertion statements,
means behavior, for multiple providers.
On Mon, Oct 3, 2016 at 7:38 PM, Benedikt Ritter <br...@apache.org> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> now that we have a separate branch for the JUnit 5 support in the surefire
> repo, I'm asking myself how to much things forward. I've added some
> additional IT implementations in my GitHub fork, but they all fail because
> the 5.0.0-M2 release of junit-surefire-provider does not implement the
> desired features.
>
> At this point I'm pretty much blocked: I can not pick up the latest changes
> to the JUnit 5 provider, because the JUnit team has not released it. The
> JUnit team does not push the development of the provider further, since
> they don't have integration tests...
> Right now I think it would be best to start implementing a JUnit 5 provider
> ourself in the junit5 branch, so we can add the missing features and have
> it ready when JUnit 5 reaches GA.
>
> Thoughts?
>
> Benedikt
>
--
Cheers
Tibor