[
https://jira.codehaus.org/browse/SUREFIRE-749?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=271450#comment-271450
]
Gili commented on SUREFIRE-749:
-------------------------------
I asked how to implement this on the TestNG mailing list and got an interesting
answer:
{quote}This is currently not possible. One way you could do this is to launch
one TestNG instance per classloader. You could also automate this by writing a
wrapper that will turn each <test> tag into its own suite and launch one TestNG
on each of these suite files. The downside is that you will get different set
of reports at the end, which you will have to put together (or you could write
your own IReporter to support that).{quote}
What do you think? Could we use this approach for both JUnit and TestNG until
they add native support?
> Parallel methods should run in separate classloaders
> ----------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: SUREFIRE-749
> URL: https://jira.codehaus.org/browse/SUREFIRE-749
> Project: Maven Surefire
> Issue Type: New Feature
> Components: Junit 4.7+ (parallel) support
> Affects Versions: 2.8.1
> Reporter: Gili
>
> When running in parallel-method or parallel-both mode, each @Test should run
> in its own ClassLoader. I'm running into a lot of problems involving the use
> of static variables in 3rd-party libraries. Here are two examples:
> 1. slf4j: http://bugzilla.slf4j.org/show_bug.cgi?id=176
> 2. guice: http://code.google.com/p/google-guice/issues/detail?id=635
> I believe running in isolated ClassLoaders would fix both problems and it
> makes a lot of sense from a test isolation point of view so we should do it
> anyway.
> I believe Surefire's forkMode is defined in terms of isolated JVMs instead of
> ClassLoaders. Furthermore, it only seems to support per-Class isolation
> instead of per-@Test isolation.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
