AFAIK we stayed on JUnit 3.8 to keep 1.4 compatibility.
Now that this is gone, what do you think about moving to JUnit 4.8
There are a few interesting new features besides the annotation goodness.
I am particularly interested in Rules which is essentially behavioral injection
before / after test
On Wed, 19 Jan 2011 17:23:14 +0100, Emmanuel Bernard
wrote:
> AFAIK we stayed on JUnit 3.8 to keep 1.4 compatibility.
> Now that this is gone, what do you think about moving to JUnit 4.8
I think moving to JUnit 4.8 shouldn't be hard, especially since it
contains a Junit 3
runner so that you
Forgot to mention, Envers is using testNG. It would be nice to align
frameworks.
On Wed, 19 Jan 2011 17:23:14 +0100, Emmanuel Bernard
wrote:
> AFAIK we stayed on JUnit 3.8 to keep 1.4 compatibility.
> Now that this is gone, what do you think about moving to JUnit 4.8
>
> There are a few inte
Speaking of good tools
FEST-assert (http://fest.easytesting.org/ fluent assertions) is pretty neat too.
Emmanuel
On 19 janv. 2011, at 17:32, Hardy Ferentschik wrote:
> On Wed, 19 Jan 2011 17:23:14 +0100, Emmanuel Bernard
> wrote:
>
>> AFAIK we stayed on JUnit 3.8 to keep 1.4 compatibility.
>>
Yes alignment should definitely be a goal. I've spoken with Adam and he is
not particularly tied to testng and would be fine switching over to junit if
that is the decision.
The biggest issue I have with junit is the class instance per test method.
It makes setup and teardown code fugly because e
2011/1/19 Steve Ebersole :
> Yes alignment should definitely be a goal. I've spoken with Adam and he is
> not particularly tied to testng and would be fine switching over to junit if
> that is the decision.
>
> The biggest issue I have with junit is the class instance per test method.
> It makes s
On Wednesday, January 19, 2011, at 01:39 pm, Sanne Grinovero wrote:
> > I have tried testng in the past and was not overly happy there either.
> > If I remember correctly the issue there was an inability to alter test
> > outcome (altering failures to success due to @FailureExpected e.g.).
>
> Th