What you can do it is to try to upgrade on a github clone and provide us patch to let us see which impacts it will have on existing code. It we'll help us in the future to improve our tests and what we can do with them. But like Jason said it is sure we won't introduce that in trunk for 3.0. It is too dangerous for us now because we rely on them to ensure the quality and the backward compatibility of 3.0 codebase.
Cheers, Arnaud Héritier aherit...@apache.org On Jun 7, 2010, at 8:26 PM, Jason van Zyl wrote: > We're not changing tests, that's just not a good idea. > > New tests we can consider a newer framework and patterns, but we're not > switching the old tests. That's not time well spent. > > On Jun 7, 2010, at 2:17 PM, Jemos Infra wrote: > >> Hi all, >> >> I haven't received any comments on my suggestion to move to Junit4. I >> find that still using Junit3 is ugly, it still relies on inheritance >> rather than composition and it doesn't use the potentials of frameworks >> such as TestNG (which has the ability of running tests in parallel, plus >> many other features). I'm available to do some job, but I'd need >> guidance as for the process, since I'm new to this tool from a >> development perspective. >> >> Regards, >> >> M. >> >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org >> > > Thanks, > > Jason > > ---------------------------------------------------------- > Jason van Zyl > Founder, Apache Maven > http://twitter.com/jvanzyl > --------------------------------------------------------- > > Selfish deeds are the shortest path to self destruction. > > -- The Seven Samuari, Akira Kurosawa > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
