I presume this is what you are talking about:
// TODO: this is a bit dodgy, but isTestNGClass wasn't working
if ( "junit.framework.TestCase".equals(
testSet.getTestClass().getSuperclass().getName() ) )
{
xmlTest.setJUnit( true );
}
Dodgy, indeed. Should it be something like this?
clazz = Class.forName( "junit.framework.Test" );
if ( testSet.getTestClass().isAssignableFrom( clazz ) )
{
...
}
-----Original Message-----
From: Brett Porter [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, May 17, 2006 12:32 PM
To: Maven Developers List
Subject: Re: surefire patch needs review
It looks fine, but incomplete. I'd forgotten about this better base
class, and also referenced TestCase in the TestNG provider. If you can
update that as well, then it should be fine.
I've given you commit rights on surefire.
Cheers,
Brett
Mike Perham wrote:
> I have fixed http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MSUREFIRE-113 but don't
> have commit privileges. This is a major regression versus 2.1.3 and
> for those of us who run Junit tests via suites a blocker.
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For
> additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
--
Apache Maven - http://maven.apache.org/
Better Builds with Maven - http://library.mergere.com/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional
commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
