[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ARTEMIS-1276?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16098479#comment-16098479
 ] 

ASF GitHub Bot commented on ARTEMIS-1276:
-----------------------------------------

Github user jdanekrh commented on the issue:

    https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/1407
  
    The only change to test is adding line 
`commonSettings.setExpiryAddress(dla);` in broker creation. That causes the 
test to progress further (passes assert) and then the test tries to cast 
`Broker` it got from calling `getRegionBroker` to `RegionBroker`, so that had 
to be implemented (using mockito). And then it looks at statistics (messages in 
flight) so then I had to write a wrapper/fake/whatever-it-should-be-called for 
that.


> [openwire-tests] Enable more OpenWire tests (from ActiveMQ 5)
> -------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: ARTEMIS-1276
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ARTEMIS-1276
>             Project: ActiveMQ Artemis
>          Issue Type: Test
>          Components: OpenWire
>    Affects Versions: 2.2.0
>            Reporter: Jiri Danek
>            Priority: Minor
>
> I've been looking into the currently disabled OpenWire tests, if there is a 
> way to implement support for more of them and enable them.
> I believe I've made some progress on this front, so I'd wish to discuss
> 1) what is the endgame about these tests; do we want to eventually run them 
> all, or is it expected to to ignore some?
> 2) what tests would be useful to enable now? I've been looking at them from 
> the point of how easy it is to enable them, not how useful it is.
> 3) would it be ok to add mockito as a test dependency? it seems useful, 
> because sometimes it is necessary to wrap something in ActiveMQ5 class, and 
> doing a proxy avoids having to invoke superclass constructors (when the thing 
> that needs to be implemented is a class and not an interface). Mockito is IMO 
> nicer to use than using java.lang.reflect.Proxy.newProxyInstance directly.
> and propose PR based on that discussion.



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.4.14#64029)

Reply via email to