Let's talk more about the workaround tomorrow to determine how easy and
reusable that might be.

We could also reach out to the JUnit community to get a possible ETA for
releasing 4.13.

-Kirk


On Tue, May 10, 2016 at 4:48 PM, Mark Bretl <[email protected]> wrote:

> I agree with Dan that depending on a SNAPSHOT version is probably not the
> best, especially when it is a major part running our tests. This could have
> problems when no developers change anything but JUnit releases a new
> snapshot and the nightly build uses the newest release resulting in new
> failures.
>
> I would be in favor of a workaround, if we have consensus, until the actual
> 4.13 release.
>
> --Mark
>
> On Tue, May 10, 2016 at 4:26 PM, Dan Smith <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > Looking at the fix
> > <
> >
> https://github.com/junit-team/junit4/commit/37a8aaba8a817b4bebbeebcd645d304601a0c8f0
> > >
> > a little bit, I think we can work around this with the current version of
> > junit with something like this. We just need to create our own runner
> > factory that will return the correct annotations.
> >
> > @Category(UnitTest.class)
> > @RunWith(Parameterized.class)
> > @UseParametersRunnerFactory(MyRunnerFactory.class)
> > public class YourTest {...}
> >
> >
> > public class MyRunnerFactory implements ParametersRunnerFactory {
> >
> >     @Override public Runner createRunnerForTestWithParameters(final
> > TestWithParameters test)
> >       throws InitializationError
> >     {
> >       return new BlockJUnit4ClassRunnerWithParameters(test) {
> >         @Override protected Annotation[] getRunnerAnnotations() {
> >           return getTestClass().getAnnotations();
> >         }
> >       };
> >     }
> > }
> >
> > -Dan
> >
> >
> >
> > On Tue, May 10, 2016 at 3:58 PM, Dan Smith <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > > If we switch to a snapshot release, that means the version of junit
> will
> > > be a moving target, right? So if someone checks a breaking change into
> > > junit all of our builds will fail. Or worse, not fail. I'm not sure if
> > > that's state we want to be in.
> > >
> > > -Dan
> > >
> > > On Tue, May 10, 2016 at 2:54 PM, Jens Deppe <[email protected]>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > >> Kirk recently found that test classes annotated with both @Category
> and
> > >> @Parameterized (both standard JUnit annotations) result in tests being
> > >> skipped [1]
> > >>
> > >> It appears that JUnit 4.13-SNAPSHOT fixes the issue.
> > >>
> > >> Does anyone have any aversion to using a 'SNAPSHOT' release for junit?
> > >>
> > >> An alternative is to use JunitParamsRunner [2]. However I've already
> run
> > >> into a problem with it in that params are not exposed to @Before
> methods
> > >> which means that any @Before code, using parameters, would need to be
> > >> explicitly called from every test method.
> > >>
> > >> Thoughts? Comments?
> > >>
> > >> --Jens
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GEODE-1350
> > >> [2] http://pragmatists.github.io/JUnitParams/
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> >
>

Reply via email to