I'm sorry, I can't help you but you're pretty much describing while the Lucene and Query modules use JUnit exclusively.
Rather than spreading the @Parameter virus, I'd rather see a tendency to move things to JUnit. It doesn't have some of the TestNG features but it's easy to extend - I just think that for a project like this one is better of by making custom and reliable extensions than to use a general purpose cryptic framework. 2cents.. Sanne On 19 May 2016 at 16:05, Radim Vansa <rva...@redhat.com> wrote: > Uuuh... if it was just so easy. Now I've played with @Factory, > @DataProvider and others (since we want to parameterize whole class, not > just invocation of method), and it's broken - I can't simply rename the > test according to parameters, it behaves differently in IntelliJ and on > command line and also with different versions of TestNG. But that's just > aesthetic concern. > > Another problem is the resource tracking AbstractInfinispanTest uses: > > @BeforeTest/AfterTest is ran only once per class, not per instance > @BeforeClass/AfterClass is ran once per instance, but in a loop on the > instances within the same thread, before the methods are executed > > The tests are then run in the order instance1.test1(), > instance2.test1(), instance1.test2() - so this needs to be reordered > using IMethodInterceptor. Luckily, the BeforeClass invocation is lazy > and AfterClass is eager, so these methods are invoked when these should be. > > So, at this point [1] I managed to get the tests running fine, and if I > omit the testName in @Test, it is reported correctly in > target/surefire-reports/. However, the output that's printed when I run > maven test does not involve the parameter, and in IntelliJ the test > subsequent result gets just marked with (x) where x is some number. When > testName is set, it's repeated for all results in reports, in IntelliJ > as well (with (x) for each method invocation), and commandline output is > not changed. > > If anyone knows how to fix that, go for it - I don't know what IntelliJ > or the surefire reporter picks. Just a hint - ITest interface won't help > you, that just spoils everything. > > Radim > > [1] https://github.com/rvansa/infinispan/tree/t_test_factory > > On 05/18/2016 05:02 PM, Dan Berindei wrote: >> On Tue, May 17, 2016 at 3:26 PM, Tristan Tarrant <ttarr...@redhat.com> wrote: >>> On 17/05/2016 14:10, Radim Vansa wrote: >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> I've decided to start working on Scattered Cache [1][2] POC. I'd like to >>>> use most of the tests for distributed mode, but just extending >>>> DistXxxTest with ScatteredXxxTest and overriding getCacheMode() seems >>>> quite inelegant, though this is a common practice for repl/dist tests. I >>>> had similar problem with Simple Cache, but I didn't need as many tests >>>> for that. >>>> >>>> @Parameters are not used as much in our testsuite - is there any reason >>> Not using @Parameters is a mistake, IMHO, so if you're willing to >>> convert the relevant ones, that would be lovely. >>> >> +1 to switch to @Parameters as many tests as you want! >> >> Dan >> _______________________________________________ >> infinispan-dev mailing list >> infinispan-dev@lists.jboss.org >> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev > > > -- > Radim Vansa <rva...@redhat.com> > JBoss Performance Team > > _______________________________________________ > infinispan-dev mailing list > infinispan-dev@lists.jboss.org > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev _______________________________________________ infinispan-dev mailing list infinispan-dev@lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev
