Let me repeat it another time: my proposal is not to drop junit 3, 4, testng, spock and friends support, my proposal is to move to junit engine abstraction instead of having our own so there is no JUnit5 migration plan in my proposal.
Romain Manni-Bucau @rmannibucau <https://x.com/rmannibucau> | .NET Blog <https://dotnetbirdie.github.io/> | Blog <https://rmannibucau.github.io/> | Old Blog <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <https://github.com/rmannibucau> | LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Book <https://www.packtpub.com/en-us/product/java-ee-8-high-performance-9781788473064> Javaccino founder (Java/.NET service - contact via linkedin) Le lun. 29 sept. 2025 à 15:32, Gary Gregory <[email protected]> a écrit : > I can confirm that have at lesst 1 private project (corporate day job) and > at least 1 Apache project that are "stuck" on JUnit 3 and 4. Migrating to > JUnit 5 is not free, especially if you rely on custom rules. > > Gary > > > On Mon, Sep 29, 2025, 08:56 Elliotte Rusty Harold <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > I am very skeptical that this is feasible. I still encounter new > > projects with JUnit *3*. There are a phenomenal number of projects in > > active development that depend on JUnit 3 and 4. JUnit 3, 4, and 5 are > > very different frameworks and migrating from one to the next is not > > trivial and usually not important or a wise use of developer time. Any > > action that's predicated on everyone moving to JUnit 5 seems like a > > non-starter. > > > > On Mon, Sep 29, 2025 at 7:09 AM Romain Manni-Bucau > > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > Hi all, > > > > > > I'd like to start a thread about potentially dropping surefire totally. > > > The rational is that surefire (and failsafe) are mainly an abstraction > > > layer on top of main test providers. > > > However, since JUnit5 the platform/engine is itself such an abstraction > > > layer and a runner. > > > > > > On another side, testng and junit4 are slowly getting abandonned - even > > EE > > > TCK started to move. > > > > > > In terms of additional features we do have the maven site integratoin - > > but > > > I doubt it is much used outside and to be honest it can be replaced > with > > a > > > github/dev-factory link with more benefit these days. > > > > > > So overall I think we can converge by dropping surefire plugin in favor > > of > > > a thin wrapper of junit5 console runner ([1]). > > > > > > Short terms I'm sure Christian could help us getting something fast > based > > > on its implementation ([2] - including a small surefire compatibility > > mode) > > > and long term it will reduce the maintenance cost we do have for a very > > > poor gain in current world (site and remoting are no more key features > > > thanks the CI and doc evolution). > > > > > > Wdyt? Is maven 4 the mometum to do it? > > > > > > [1] > > > > > > https://docs.junit.org/current/user-guide/#running-tests-console-launcher > > > [2] https://github.com/sormuras/junit-platform-maven-plugin > > > > > > Romain Manni-Bucau > > > @rmannibucau <https://x.com/rmannibucau> | .NET Blog > > > <https://dotnetbirdie.github.io/> | Blog < > https://rmannibucau.github.io/> > > | Old > > > Blog <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github > > > <https://github.com/rmannibucau> | LinkedIn > > > <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Book > > > < > > > https://www.packtpub.com/en-us/product/java-ee-8-high-performance-9781788473064 > > > > > > Javaccino founder (Java/.NET service - contact via linkedin) > > > > > > > > -- > > Elliotte Rusty Harold > > [email protected] > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > > > > >
