[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-6175?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15950498#comment-15950498
]
ASF GitHub Bot commented on FLINK-6175:
---------------------------------------
Github user zentol commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/3655
It would be less intrusive, that's true. I do prefer staying away from
mockito magic as far as possible though Mockito often results in failing tests
even though no public contract was modified/violated: in those 4 lines alone
you rely on 3 _internal_ details to not change for the test to succeed (name of
the Field, class of the Field, way of execution (run()).
This now means that when the implementation changes so must the test, which
kind of defeats their purpose of comparing a new implementation to a known
use-case; as well as introducing a risk for additional bugs to sneak in.
> HistoryServerTest.testFullArchiveLifecycle fails
> ------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: FLINK-6175
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-6175
> Project: Flink
> Issue Type: Test
> Components: Tests, Webfrontend
> Reporter: Ufuk Celebi
> Assignee: Chesnay Schepler
>
> https://s3.amazonaws.com/archive.travis-ci.org/jobs/213933823/log.txt
> {code}
> estFullArchiveLifecycle(org.apache.flink.runtime.webmonitor.history.HistoryServerTest)
> Time elapsed: 2.162 sec <<< FAILURE!
> java.lang.AssertionError: /joboverview.json did not contain valid json
> at org.junit.Assert.fail(Assert.java:88)
> at org.junit.Assert.assertTrue(Assert.java:41)
> at org.junit.Assert.assertNotNull(Assert.java:712)
> at
> org.apache.flink.runtime.webmonitor.history.HistoryServerTest.testFullArchiveLifecycle(HistoryServerTest.java:98)
> {code}
> Happened on a branch with unrelated changes [~Zentol].
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.15#6346)
