On 4/3/07, Daniel John Debrunner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
The way junit test runs via ant are setup is a single target junit-oneclass and multiple antcall calls to that target, each supplying a different test class. I wondering if there's a good reason to do it this way?
No, there was no particular reason for doing it that way. Seemed like a good idea at the time to avoid duplication of settings for the <junit> task when I added the JDBC 4 tests, I guess, but it looks like with the perTest fork option, it would be better to just use nested <test>s. Then we only ever need two <junit>s: one for JDBC 4 / JDK 1.6 and one with the rest of the tests. andrew
