I think a full implementation with Mockito is untenable. It seems I would
need to mock an excessive amount of function returns and the result may
still be inflexible and finnicky.
I'll follow the JenkinsRule method you're talking about...I expect I can
still mock the date data. Thanks for the help here. :)
On Monday, July 8, 2019 at 6:08:33 PM UTC-4, Gavin Mogan wrote:
>
> That shouldn't be the case if you use JenkinsRule, actually create the
> project, and run a quick echo pipeline a few times.
>
> I know from working on the java 11 stuff, that mockito has trouble mocking
> functions that are final, it'll silently not do so. Its going to save you a
> ton of headaches to use JenkinsRule.
>
> @Rule
> public JenkinsRule j = new JenkinsRule()
>
> p = j.createFreeStyleProject("name");
> jenkins.assertBuildStatus(Result.SUCCESS, p.scheduleBuild2(0)); // build 1
> jenkins.assertBuildStatus(Result.SUCCESS, p.scheduleBuild2(0)); // build 2
> jenkins.assertBuildStatus(Result.SUCCESS, p.scheduleBuild2(0)); // build 3
>
> but i see you are messing with dates, so that might be trickier, i'm not
> sure.
>
> You can try subclassing FreeStyleProject, and overriding the function to
> return the value you want.
> If that works fine, then its how the function matching/overriding works in
> mockito, if it doesn't work, then its the weird final/static stuff that
> mockito has trouble with. You might need to also use powermock and prepare
> for test.
>
> On Mon, Jul 8, 2019 at 12:40 PM 'Benjamin Beggs' via Jenkins Developers <
> [email protected] <javascript:>> wrote:
>
>> The issue here is with my build history instantiation. All build retrieve
>> calls return null regardless of method (getFirstBuild, getLastBuild,
>> getBuildByNumber, etc).
>>
>> On Monday, July 8, 2019 at 3:24:47 PM UTC-4, Benjamin Beggs wrote:
>>>
>>> I will investigate this further, thanks for pointing this implementation
>>> out to me.
>>>
>>> On Monday, July 8, 2019 at 1:52:40 PM UTC-4, Jesse Glick wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, Jul 8, 2019 at 1:39 PM 'Benjamin Beggs' via Jenkins Developers
>>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>> > Do you have an example of a similar implementation for unit testing
>>>> using jenkinsrule? I may try just porting the tests over to this.
>>>>
>>>> I would definitely advise using `JenkinsRule` over mocking frameworks.
>>>> Slower, but much more realistic (and much more likely to continue
>>>> running after internal refactorings). Example:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> https://github.com/jenkinsci/jenkins/blob/a6f5b2b1288d15cd2ea5c2fd9b8916e6397bf795/test/src/test/java/hudson/tasks/LogRotatorTest.java#L67-L82
>>>>
>>>>
>>> --
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
>> "Jenkins Developers" group.
>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
>> email to [email protected] <javascript:>.
>> To view this discussion on the web visit
>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/jenkinsci-dev/610d3de0-c377-4c4c-bd2d-db00c84b6f41%40googlegroups.com
>>
>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/jenkinsci-dev/610d3de0-c377-4c4c-bd2d-db00c84b6f41%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
>> .
>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>>
>
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Jenkins Developers" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/jenkinsci-dev/529dd72d-c30c-44df-83b5-e4ffacfa7694%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
