dfabulich wrote:
Inter-class dependencies are one of TestNG's fundamental features
Use of this feature is optional. For my sake, call it an abuse of TestNG
if I run that simple unit tests without inter-class dependencies ;-)
dfabulich wrote:
[...] but TestNG is meant to support
Jason van Zyl wrote:
Correct me if I'm wrong here Benjamin but I think he's talking about
stating what tests you want to run, and how they are grouped
declaratively. As a best practice don't use suites and come up with a
way in Surefire to group things and avoid grouping of things in code.
Benjamin Bentmann wrote:
I see. Now, if the user can provide an option to Surefire, indicating
that the unit tests do not have inter-class dependencies, wouldn't this
allow to get back the old behavior? I.e. enabling Surefire to pass test
classes individually into TestNG?
That option sounds
Steve Loughran wrote:
What I propose is that, in order to avoid destroying information, Surefire
should generate XML that looks like Example 7 (all-in-one-file), and not
try to fake it to look like Example 2 (one-file-per-class). (TestNG's
junit-like output also generates files like Example
Benjamin Bentmann wrote:
For my curiosity: What would be the benefit of setting up a hand-crafted
test suite? I am a lazy guy and prefer the dumb machine to do the nasty
things for me so I really like the idea of just dropping a test class into
src/test/java without bothering to additionally
