Github user geomacy commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-brooklyn/pull/1030#issuecomment-158995925
I had a look today at using the new general purpose TestFrameworkAssertions
as per Alexâs comment
[above](https://github.com/apache/incubator-brooklyn/pull/1030#discussion_r45317688).
One issue with that is that the general purpose code doesnât give the
same level of detail in the error message if the assertions fail. For
instance with a test with several failing assertions:
```
- type: org.apache.brooklyn.test.framework.SimpleShellCommandTest
targetId: testprocess5
command: hostname
assertStatus:
- equals: 1
assertOut:
- equals: bogus
- contains: porkpie
assertErr:
- equals: explosion
```
The general purpose class gives the following:
```
Failure running task invoking start[locations] on 1 node (JnQQSTYi):
org.apache.brooklyn.util.exceptions.PropagatedRuntimeException:
org.apache.brooklyn.util.exceptions.PropagatedRuntimeException: Error invoking
start at TestCaseImpl{id=UwYqp5yt}:
org.apache.brooklyn.util.exceptions.PropagatedRuntimeException:
java.lang.AssertionError: expected [true] but found [false]
```
While the current code gives
```
Failure running task start (Lbltxgqq): java.lang.AssertionError: Assertion
Failures: exit code equals 1 stdout equals bogus stdout contains porkpie stderr
equals explosion
```
It may be valuable to extend the general purpose code to give more detail
but I think thatâs a separate issue from 1030. I think the other comments
are all done, so I would like to propose leaving the assertion handling as it
is for the moment, in which case I hope this PR could be merged?
Let me know what you think,
regards
Geoff
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at [email protected] or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---
