Just thought I'd share - after a second pass at this I was able to avoid
PowerMock when modifying the class under test to use constructor DI. I
think initially I was a bit reluctant to modify the production code here
but on a second look I think it was the right thing to do. Just wanted to
share
I don't think you necessarily need to redo your work Ryan. I just think
something has been left behind by the test. It looks like a mock made
its way into the JMX "Server" in the log4j code.
On 11/14/18 10:57 AM, Ryan McMahon wrote:
I will write up a story to address the use of PowerMock
I've created a Jira to track the elimination of PowerMock from these tests
in particular, which will probably involve doing the major refactoring
mentioned in item #4 in my previous email.
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GEODE-6052
On Wed, Nov 14, 2018 at 10:57 AM Ryan McMahon
wrote:
> I
I will write up a story to address the use of PowerMock in these JMX tests
in particular. I remember attempting to avoid PowerMock when writing this
test, because I agree that it should be avoided. I just want to explain my
thinking so that we can discuss what would have been a better approach.
I'm running into the same PowerMock problem that Kirk hit. I can find
only one test that uses PowerMock and invokes registerMBean -
MBeanJMXAdapterTest. This is a new test that was checked in mid-October.
commit 76420dcd93e17f009aa73ca8188d135158358323
Author: Ryan McMahon
Date: Wed Oct
