danberindei commented on pull request #240: URL: https://github.com/apache/maven-surefire/pull/240#issuecomment-679899226
@Tibor17 I have tested `SurefireForkNodeFactory` in our project and it works great. The `implementation` attribute with the full class name is a bit clunky, but it's not something users will want to change all the time, so I don't mind. I can't say I like the `forkNode` name though, there's no indication anywhere what the "node" part is referring to. Since a `ForkNodeFactory` produces `ForkChannel` instances, I believe the factory should be `ForkChannelFactory` and the XML element should be `<forkChannel>`. Additionally, the example link in the [forkNode description](https://maven.apache.org/surefire/maven-surefire-plugin/test-mojo.html#forkNode) doesn't work, and the example still uses `fork*M*ode` [in one place](https://github.com/apache/maven-surefire/blob/master/maven-surefire-plugin/src/site/apt/examples/process-communication.apt.vm#L39). ---------------------------------------------------------------- This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: [email protected]
