Sorry Donald, I missed that issue. I'd prefer the jUnit 4 annotation over any homegrown solution. The catch with jUnit 4 is that (at least in my experience) it quadruples the memory requirement to run the tests as is. Setting test.jvm.arguments=-Xmx2G probably isn't viable for most devs (tried with 768M, 1G, and 2G, only the latter worked for me).
Regarding @Ignore, I think it should replace @AllowFailure instead of adding two annotations that do nearly the same thing. Will take a closer look tonight, time permitting. -mike On Mon, Apr 6, 2009 at 11:23 AM, Donald Woods <[email protected]> wrote: > I would rather see us use a Junit v4 annotation like @Ignore as provided > via OPENJPA-998 (which just needs someone to review and commit it...) > > /** > * Signals to the harness to ignore the annotated test. > * > */ > @Target({TYPE, METHOD}) > @Retention(RUNTIME)f > public @interface Ignore {r > boolean value() default true; > String message() default ""; > } > > > After the above is added, the @AllowFailure support can be removed and the > ClassSelector.java updated to look for @Ignore by default. > > > -Donald > > > > Michael Dick wrote: > >> Hi all, >> >> The AllowFailure annotation is very useful in that it allows specific test >> methods to be ignored during a typical Maven build. >> >> The implementation, however is rather confusing as a "clean" build of >> OpenJPA will typically contain several stack traces from exceptions. >> Running >> these optional tests that currently do not pass just consumes CPU cycles >> that could be better spent elsewhere. >> >> I propose refactoring @AllowFailure to be called @OptionalTest (or just >> @Optional) and updating the supporting methods in PersistenceTestCase so >> that test methods (or classes) annotated with @OptionalTest are skipped >> unless a jvm system property is true (ie -Dopenjpa.optional.tests=true). >> >> I think this will save everyone's CPU cycles without violating the intent >> of >> @AllowFailure. In addition with this change we could resurrect the changes >> for OPENJPA-770 and we could clean up the root pom.xml a bit. >> >> Anyone else have strong opinions about @AllowFailure? >> >> -mike >> >>
