Thanks for driving this. +1 for the proposal. Can we also prevent Junit4 usage in new code by this way？Because currently we are aiming to migrate our codebase to JUnit 5.
Best, Lijie Piotr Nowojski <pnowoj...@apache.org> 于2023年4月25日周二 23:02写道： > Ok, thanks for the clarification. > > Piotrek > > wt., 25 kwi 2023 o 16:38 Chesnay Schepler <ches...@apache.org> napisał(a): > > > The checkstyle rule would just ban certain imports. > > We'd add exclusions for all existing usages as we did when introducing > > other rules. > > So far we usually disabled checkstyle rules for a specific files. > > > > On 25/04/2023 16:34, Piotr Nowojski wrote: > > > +1 to the idea. > > > > > > How would this checkstyle rule work? Are you suggesting to start with a > > > number of exclusions? On what level will those exclusions be? Per file? > > Per > > > line? > > > > > > Best, > > > Piotrek > > > > > > wt., 25 kwi 2023 o 13:18 David Morávek <d...@apache.org> napisał(a): > > > > > >> Hi Everyone, > > >> > > >> A long time ago, the community decided not to use Mockito-based tests > > >> because those are hard to maintain. This is already baked in our Code > > Style > > >> and Quality Guide [1]. > > >> > > >> Because we still have Mockito imported into the code base, it's very > > easy > > >> for newcomers to unconsciously introduce new tests violating the code > > style > > >> because they're unaware of the decision. > > >> > > >> I propose to prevent Mockito usage with a Checkstyle rule for a new > > code, > > >> which would eventually allow us to eliminate it. This could also > prevent > > >> some wasted work and unnecessary feedback cycles during reviews. > > >> > > >> WDYT? > > >> > > >> [1] > > >> > > >> > > > https://flink.apache.org/how-to-contribute/code-style-and-quality-common/#avoid-mockito---use-reusable-test-implementations > > >> > > >> Best, > > >> D. > > >> > > > > >
