Hi Ivan , We do have access to the docker client via test containers.
There is no binding between test containers and any test framework all the underlying methods and classes and fully exposed so they can be mapped to any test harness. -Ali On Fri, Jun 15, 2018 at 11:37 AM, Jerry Peng <jerry.boyang.p...@gmail.com> wrote: > Sounds good! > > On Fri, Jun 15, 2018 at 1:53 AM Ivan Kelly <iv...@apache.org> wrote: > > > Thanks for starting this conversation Ali. The current tests use > > arquillian, but there's nothing in the tests that's intimately tied to > > it, so if we were to remove it there wouldn't be that much that needs > > to change. > > > > On Thu, Jun 14, 2018 at 8:21 PM, Ali Ahmed <alahmed...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > I am proposing we move our current integration test harness from using > > the > > > current arquillian framework to testcontainers ``` > > > https://www.testcontainers.org/``` <https://www.testcontainers.org/>. > > > > Test containers looks interesting. > > > > A couple of questions around testcontainers. > > - Does it support testng? The website only mentions junit, and all > > pulsar testing is testng. > > - Does it give you access to the docker-java DockerClient? Lots of the > > current utilities use that. > > > > Before committing to a migration, it would be good to validate that > > everything we currently do with arquillian can be done with test > > containers by migrating one of the existing tests (smoke for example). > > > > > The benefits are improved stability > > > > ?? I've not seen any stability issues with arquillian which were > > caused by the framework itself. > > > > > and slightly faster execution but more > > > > Do you have any numbers for this? The slowness i've seen in the tests > > is mostly down container creation, and I don't think that will go away > > if we change frameworks. > > > > > importably arquillian has some issues with developing reusable test > > classes > > > and objects so we end creating multiple test projects each with there > own > > > arquillian xml. > > > > It would be nice to get rid of this limitation. > > > > -Ivan > > >
