Hi Kevin! Sorry to comment about TestNG on the Tapestry list, but you might guess that this thread caught my attention :-).
I thought I have addressed the @Factory problem: it's quite impossible to handle: in case your real test is already marked as @Test than you might finally decide to run it either directly or through a @Factory. However smart the plugin would be it would not be able to figure out your intention ;-). About the other one I cannot comment, because I am not sure what you are refering too. Please let us know and we will try to figure out a solution. cheers, ./alex -- .w( the_mindstorm )p. TestNG: http://testng.org On 2/12/06, Kevin Menard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Sun, 12 Feb 2006 02:16:07 -0500, Jesse Kuhnert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > > Just being curious, what caused the need for creating an xml file? Only > > because of my recent interactions. > > Two issues that have been rather annoying for me is the failure for the > plug-in to properly detect @Factory. Rather than use the factory to > invoke instances of a particular class, the plugin attempts to create a > copy of the class with arbitrary parameters, which will almost certainly > cause the test to fail. > > The other issue is that it won't detect any classes that don't have @Test > somewhere in the class. Thus, if you like to build a test hierarchy using > template methods, your subclasses won't run. > > Both issues seem to have gone away when I provided my own testng.xml file, > but that was more work than I really wanted to do. It also makes it > difficult to right-click on a class to run just that class. > > -- > Kevin > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
