Andreas: -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Re: pax exam config duplication From: Andreas Pieber <[email protected]> To: General OPS4J <[email protected]> Date: Fri 28 Sep 2012 10:53:08 AM CDT > > BTW guys another point here: you'll have an additional problem since > how you want to run the tests via mvn AND the IDE then? > you are right; I see 2 ways to unify mvn + ide
1) make @RunWith(JUnit4TestRunner.class) processor "real smart" 2) use eclipse + m2e as ide of choice :-) cheers. Andrei > Kind regards, > Andreas > > On Sep 28, 2012 5:32 PM, "Andrei Pozolotin" > <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > *Björn** > * > -------- Original Message -------- > Subject: Re: pax exam config duplication > From: Björn Pollex <[email protected]> > <mailto:[email protected]> > To: General OPS4J <[email protected]> > <mailto:[email protected]> > Date: Fri 28 Sep 2012 06:45:25 AM CDT >> Hello Andrei! > hello - and thanks for thinking about this; > >> I am not aware of any such tool. Anyway I think that a fully >> automated solution might not be that simple. To run your bundle, >> you'd have to provision all dependencies in the runtime classpath. > yes >> Dependencies that are in scope providedcould in theory also be >> provisioned, but I don't think that would be very intuitive. > yes >> Also, you'd probably requires some, but not all of the >> dependencies in scope test to be provisioned. For instance, you >> might want to use Mockito or something like that in your >> test-probe. Provisioning all test-scoped dependencies would also >> provision Pax Exam itself, for instance, which is probably not >> what you want. > this could be filtered by maven "profile"; > > namely, make a convention, > that pax-exam-stuff not to be auto-provisioned should be included > in "pax-exam" profile > >> So, in my opinion, the only practical approach would be to >> provision runtime-scoped dependencies, and configure the rest >> manually. But that is neither one nor the other, so I don't think >> I like it very much. > so, how about this: > > *pax exam auto-provision**rules:** > * > *include** > ** provided > * runtime > * test > > *exclude:** > ** everything from "pax-exam" profile > >> Greetings, >> >> Björn > cheers, > > Andrei. > >> >> On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 10:56 PM, Andrei Pozolotin >> <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> >> wrote: >> >> Hello >> >> I am curious if there is a way to avoid completely >> entries like >> >> mavenBundle().groupId("org.apache.felix") >> >> .artifactId("org.apache.felix.fileinstall") >> .versionAsInProject(), >> >> from pax exam test options definitions >> public static Option[] options( final Option... >> options ) >> >> it seems it should be possible to come up with some kind >> of maven-based convention, >> so all of this can be taken directly from the pom? are >> there tools for this? >> >> Thank you, >> >> Andrei >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> general mailing list >> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> >> http://lists.ops4j.org/mailman/listinfo/general >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> general mailing list >> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> >> http://lists.ops4j.org/mailman/listinfo/general > > > _______________________________________________ > general mailing list > [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > http://lists.ops4j.org/mailman/listinfo/general > > > > _______________________________________________ > general mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.ops4j.org/mailman/listinfo/general
_______________________________________________ general mailing list [email protected] http://lists.ops4j.org/mailman/listinfo/general
