On Sat, Nov 28, 2009 at 10:14 AM, Thomas Broyer <[email protected]> wrote:
> the -runStyle argument documentation from JUnitShell says you can pass > the fully qualified name of a class. What it doesn't say, first, > thought that's somehow implicit, is that this class has to extend > RunStyle. > But RunStyle is package-protected, forcing you to put your class in > the com.google.gwt.junit package. This means you just have to name > your class starting with "RunStyle" and you can use it without passing > its FQN; so actually this "FQN feature" is quite useless. > > I don't think that's what you really want though; it seems like > RunStyle was meant to be public so you can extend it in any package > you like, and then pass the FQN of your class to -runStyle. > > For the time being, I'll put my RunStyleAir in the > com.google.gwt.junit package because I have no other choice; but I > don't really like using others' packages for my own work; that somehow > defeats the whole notion of package naming (which I see similar to XML > namespaces). > On the plus side, it will allow developers to use it with "-runStyle > Air" instead of "-runStyle net.ltgt.gwt.air.junit.RunStyleAir" ;-) > I agree it should be public. -- John A. Tamplin Software Engineer (GWT), Google -- http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors
