I remember that m-surefire-plugin got stuck internally with some old version of Junit5
Sylwester wt., 30 wrz 2025, 15:38 użytkownik Romain Manni-Bucau <[email protected]> napisał: > Le mar. 30 sept. 2025, 14:42, Gary Gregory <[email protected]> a > écrit : > > > What I'm learning here is: > > > > - a project stuck on JUnit 3 stays on the last know version that supports > > it > > - JUnit 4, 5, and 6 projects will benefit from the new plug-in and its > more > > direct approach > > - other test frameworks like TestNG are supported through JUnit 4+ > > > > Is that about right? > > > > Junit 5 is a plateforme, if you have n engine for your test framework you > are converse. > There was one for spock which is not supporter by surefire directly for ex > so it is more you are limited to what is supporter in the wild. > > Today surefire doesn't support junit5 for that reason for ex, its filtering > layer breaks partially that. > > > > Thank you, > > Gary > > > > > > On Tue, Sep 30, 2025, 06:20 Romain Manni-Bucau <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > > > Hi Olivier, > > > > > > Why I thrown this thread is because I think we can go futher and drop > > > totally our asbtraction which has conflicts with the underlying > platform > > > (discovery for ex) and just expose junit engine so we would use their > > test > > > discovery, their test filtering etc... > > > This would make the configuration less awckward and the code way less > > > abstracted so easier to maintain. > > > > > > Not saying your PR is not awesome (it is) but I think we can leverage > > maven > > > 4 to break a bit more and do our big housecleaning ;). > > > > > > No strong opinion on the plugin name but options should converge more > > IMHO. > > > > > > 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 mar. 30 sept. 2025 à 11:12, Olivier Lamy <[email protected]> a > écrit : > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > You should have a look at the work already started with this PR [1] > > > > and previously discussed on Slack. I wanted to reach a certain level > > > > of stability before bringing it up on the mailing list. > > > > The current approach leverages the JUnit 5 platform/engine to run all > > > > tests from JUnit 4.12 (via junit vintage which cannot run anything > > > > before 4.12) onward up to JUnit 5 (6 shouldn't be a problem). TestNG > > > > support still needs to be added, but this shouldn't be an issue as > > > > it's an external engine to add (similar to add vintage engine for > > > > junit4) > > > > > > > > This change deliberately drops support for older JUnit versions prior > > > > to 4.12, which are no longer maintained even by the Junit team. > > > > Users who still rely on those outdated/EOL versions can continue > using > > > > the last Surefire release that supports them. > > > > That code is effectively frozen, and no further updates are expected > > > > for legacy JUnit support. > > > > > > > > I believe this is a good direction because it preserves the same > > > > plugin name and user-facing configuration, so the impact for users is > > > > minimal. > > > > At the same time, it gives us much cleaner internals, reduces > > > > duplication, removes a lot of dead code, and significantly cuts down > > > > on maintenance overhead with surefire. > > > > > > > > Regards > > > > Olivier > > > > > > > > [1] https://github.com/apache/maven-surefire/pull/3179 > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, 29 Sept 2025 at 17:18, 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) > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > > > > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
