Both old Jenkins builds [1] already use JDK 8. So this should not be a problem.
[1] https://builds.apache.org/job/maven-surefire/ https://builds.apache.org/job/maven-surefire-windows/ On Mon, Oct 10, 2016 at 7:03 PM, Benedikt Ritter [via Maven] < ml-node+s40175n5882750...@n5.nabble.com> wrote: > Hello again, > > Tibor Digana <[hidden email] > <http:///user/SendEmail.jtp?type=node&node=5882750&i=0>> schrieb am Mi., > 5. Okt. 2016 um > 00:05 Uhr: > > > >>Or do we want to even share the test projects and work with profiles > in > > the test project pom? > > > > I mean this. > > > > It pretty depends on what we are going to test, either: > > + features of surefire-junit5 provider, or > > + features of junit5 itself. > > > > I would say the provider in the first phase, and in the second phase we > > should identify junit5 features which do not exist in junit4 but may > > influence, e.g. Surefire report. > > > > The main purpose of integration testing is the interoperability between > the > > main process of Maven and surefire (forked jvm or in-plugin process). > > > > This would lower the development time because you can already reuse > > existing tests. > > It would be nice to have profiles for vintage and jupiter. If we find > out > > difference between reports, this can be a subject to a discovered bug. > > I think we can keep all IT projects and IT classes where they are and we > > can also keep sources using JUnit4 annotations together with JUnit5 > > annotations. The best was that you split the JUni5 project into > > junit-jupiter-api and the core modules. > > If we just add junit-jupiter-api to the main <dependencies/> section in > > every POM, we do not break old tests because JUnit5 annotations do not > > break JUnit4 runners. If we want to run JUnit5 tests, then the profiles > > come into the role (one having junit-jupiter-engine > > <https://github.com/junit-team/junit5/tree/master/junit-jupiter-engine> > > and > > another profile with junit-vintage-engine > > <https://github.com/junit-team/junit5/tree/master/junit-vintage-engine>, > > > and finally profiles for old junit4 or 47). Unfortunately JUnit4 does > not > > have separate module with annotations only. Therefore we may use > > <classpathDependencyExcludes/> to exclude it if really necessary, see > > > > http://maven.apache.org/surefire/maven-surefire- > plugin/examples/configuring-classpath.html > > Do you think this would work? > > > > I found a way to this. I've modified the Junit4VersionIT again to run > against JUnit 4 and JUnit 5. > > Drawbacks: > - all tests have to be run on Java 8. Otherwise we can't have the JUnit 5 > annotations > - the profile for the jupiter engine also needs a dependency to junit 4.x. > Otherwise we get a compilation error because the old annotations are not > available. > > I think this could be a starting point. After we have merged #126 from > GitHub, I can build this on top the parameterized test. > > Regards, > Benedikt > > > > > > Cheers > > Tibor > > > > > > On Tue, Oct 4, 2016 at 7:48 PM, Benedikt Ritter [via Maven] < > > [hidden email] <http:///user/SendEmail.jtp?type=node&node=5882750&i=1>> > wrote: > > > > > Hello Tibor, > > > > > > Tibor Digana <[hidden email] > > > <http:///user/SendEmail.jtp?type=node&node=5882181&i=0>> schrieb am > Di., > > > 4. Okt. 2016 um > > > 02:29 Uhr: > > > > > > > Can you simplify and speed up writing integration tests in the way > that > > > you > > > > would parameterize the existing JUnit 4 testing by adding Maven > > profiles > > > > (one default profile and junit5 profile) having another dependencies > > and > > > > @RunWith(Parameterized.class)? > > > > This would be cool because we can have identical assertion > statements, > > > > means behavior, for multiple providers. > > > > > > > > > > I was already thinking about this, because right now I'm duplicating a > > lot > > > of the code from the ITs. This is definitely a good idea. But right > know > > I > > > don't have a clear view of how we could implement that. Do we just > share > > > the test class and work with separate test projects? Or do we want to > > even > > > share the test projects and work with profiles in the test project > pom? > > > > > > JUnit 5 also has support for running legacy tests (they call it > > > "vintage"). > > > To make a complete IT suite, we would have to run all the JUnit 4 > tests > > > against the JUnit 5 vintage engine as well. > > > > > > Lot a work ahead :-) > > > > > > Regards, > > > Benedikt > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Oct 3, 2016 at 7:38 PM, Benedikt Ritter <[hidden email] > > > <http:///user/SendEmail.jtp?type=node&node=5882181&i=1>> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > > > now that we have a separate branch for the JUnit 5 support in the > > > > surefire > > > > > repo, I'm asking myself how to much things forward. I've added > some > > > > > additional IT implementations in my GitHub fork, but they all fail > > > > because > > > > > the 5.0.0-M2 release of junit-surefire-provider does not implement > > the > > > > > desired features. > > > > > > > > > > At this point I'm pretty much blocked: I can not pick up the > latest > > > > changes > > > > > to the JUnit 5 provider, because the JUnit team has not released > it. > > > The > > > > > JUnit team does not push the development of the provider further, > > > since > > > > > they don't have integration tests... > > > > > Right now I think it would be best to start implementing a JUnit 5 > > > > provider > > > > > ourself in the junit5 branch, so we can add the missing features > and > > > have > > > > > it ready when JUnit 5 reaches GA. > > > > > > > > > > Thoughts? > > > > > > > > > > Benedikt > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > Cheers > > > > Tibor > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > > If you reply to this email, your message will be added to the > discussion > > > below: > > > http://maven.40175.n5.nabble.com/SUREFIRE-JUnit-5-support- > > > how-to-move-things-forward-tp5882104p5882181.html > > > To start a new topic under Maven Developers, email > > > [hidden email] <http:///user/SendEmail.jtp?type=node&node=5882750&i=2> > > > To unsubscribe from Maven Developers, click here > > > < > > > > > > . > > > NAML > > > < > > http://maven.40175.n5.nabble.com/template/NamlServlet.jtp? > macro=macro_viewer&id=instant_html%21nabble%3Aemail.naml& > base=nabble.naml.namespaces.BasicNamespace-nabble.view. > web.template.NabbleNamespace-nabble.view.web.template. > NodeNamespace&breadcrumbs=notify_subscribers%21nabble% > 3Aemail.naml-instant_emails%21nabble%3Aemail.naml-send_ > instant_email%21nabble%3Aemail.naml > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > View this message in context: > > http://maven.40175.n5.nabble.com/Re-SUREFIRE-Parameterized- > Tests-for-Junit-4-and-Junit-5-Was-SUREFIRE-JUnit-5-support- > how-to-move-thi-tp5882187.html > > Sent from the Maven Developers mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > > > ------------------------------ > If you reply to this email, your message will be added to the discussion > below: > http://maven.40175.n5.nabble.com/Re-SUREFIRE-Parameterized- > Tests-for-Junit-4-and-Junit-5-Was-SUREFIRE-JUnit-5-support- > how-to-move-thi-tp5882187p5882750.html > To start a new topic under Maven Developers, email > ml-node+s40175n142166...@n5.nabble.com > To unsubscribe from Maven Developers, click here > <http://maven.40175.n5.nabble.com/template/NamlServlet.jtp?macro=unsubscribe_by_code&node=142166&code=dGlib3JkaWdhbmFAYXBhY2hlLm9yZ3wxNDIxNjZ8LTI4OTQ5MjEwMg==> > . > NAML > <http://maven.40175.n5.nabble.com/template/NamlServlet.jtp?macro=macro_viewer&id=instant_html%21nabble%3Aemail.naml&base=nabble.naml.namespaces.BasicNamespace-nabble.view.web.template.NabbleNamespace-nabble.view.web.template.NodeNamespace&breadcrumbs=notify_subscribers%21nabble%3Aemail.naml-instant_emails%21nabble%3Aemail.naml-send_instant_email%21nabble%3Aemail.naml> > -- View this message in context: http://maven.40175.n5.nabble.com/Re-SUREFIRE-Parameterized-Tests-for-Junit-4-and-Junit-5-Was-SUREFIRE-JUnit-5-support-how-to-move-thi-tp5882187p5882861.html Sent from the Maven Developers mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
