Compatibility question for 4.5

[kentb]

All,

We are nearing the release of JUnit 4.5. We have a question for all you
custom runner writers out there. We have substantially restructured the
internals of JUnit4TestRunner. Would you like the current version retained
for at least one more release or shall we discard it?

Regards,

Kent Beck
Three Rivers Institute

[Nat Pryce]

Is it possible for 4.5 to support both the old and the new runners for
one release?

--Nat

2008/6/10 Kent Beck <kentb@...>:

> All,
>
> We are nearing the release of JUnit 4.5. We have a question for all you
> custom runner writers out there. We have substantially restructured the
> internals of JUnit4TestRunner. Would you like the current version retained
> for at least one more release or shall we discard it?
>
> Regards,
>
> Kent Beck
> Three Rivers Institute
>
>

[kentb]

Nat,
 
Yes, it is. That's the question: should we leave JUnit4TestRunner basically
alone and change the name of the new one to BlockTestRunner (all the various
annotations and variations are implemented as "statements" which are
assembled into a "block" to run the test instead of the hideously nested
procedure calls we had before)?
 
Regards,
 
Kent Beck
Three Rivers Institute

  _____  

From: junit@... [mailto:junit@...] On Behalf Of Nat
Pryce
Sent: Tuesday, June 10, 2008 11:36 AM
To: junit@...
Subject: Re: [junit] Compatibility question for 4.5



Is it possible for 4.5 to support both the old and the new runners for
one release?

--Nat

2008/6/10 Kent Beck <kentb@earthlink. <mailto:kentb%40earthlink.net> net>:

> All,
>
> We are nearing the release of JUnit 4.5. We have a question for all you
> custom runner writers out there. We have substantially restructured the
> internals of JUnit4TestRunner. Would you like the current version retained
> for at least one more release or shall we discard it?
>
> Regards,
>
> Kent Beck
> Three Rivers Institute
>
>

 


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[Phil Quitslund-2]

Hey all,

Keeping the current version for another release would be really handy
for us if at all possible.  Thanks for asking!


-phil


--- In junit@..., "Kent Beck" <kentb@...> wrote:
>
> All,
>
> We are nearing the release of JUnit 4.5. We have a question for all you
> custom runner writers out there. We have substantially restructured the
> internals of JUnit4TestRunner. Would you like the current version
retained
> for at least one more release or shall we discard it?
>
> Regards,
>
> Kent Beck
> Three Rivers Institute
>

[Johannes Link-2]

I vote for keeping it in for one more version. It relieves me from
porting ClasspathSuite at once and from keeping two versions around
till 4.5 will be the dominantly used version.

thanks, Johannes

--- In junit@..., "Kent Beck" <kentb@...> wrote:
>
> Nat,
>  
> Yes, it is. That's the question: should we leave JUnit4TestRunner
basically
> alone and change the name of the new one to BlockTestRunner (all the
various
> annotations and variations are implemented as "statements" which are
> assembled into a "block" to run the test instead of the hideously nested
> procedure calls we had before)?
>  
> Regards,
>  
> Kent Beck
> Three Rivers Institute

[Nat Pryce]

I vote to keep the old one for one more version, and deprecate it.
That will give us time to port jMock, and let us keep supporting
projects while they upgrade from 4.4 to 4.5.

--Nat


2008/6/10 Kent Beck <kentb@...>:

> Nat,
>
> Yes, it is. That's the question: should we leave JUnit4TestRunner basically
> alone and change the name of the new one to BlockTestRunner (all the various
> annotations and variations are implemented as "statements" which are
> assembled into a "block" to run the test instead of the hideously nested
> procedure calls we had before)?
>
> Regards,
>
> Kent Beck
> Three Rivers Institute
>
> _____
>
> From: junit@... [mailto:junit@...] On Behalf Of Nat
> Pryce
> Sent: Tuesday, June 10, 2008 11:36 AM
> To: junit@...
> Subject: Re: [junit] Compatibility question for 4.5
>
> Is it possible for 4.5 to support both the old and the new runners for
> one release?
>
> --Nat
>
> 2008/6/10 Kent Beck <kentb@earthlink. <mailto:kentb%40earthlink.net> net>:
>> All,
>>
>> We are nearing the release of JUnit 4.5. We have a question for all you
>> custom runner writers out there. We have substantially restructured the
>> internals of JUnit4TestRunner. Would you like the current version retained
>> for at least one more release or shall we discard it?
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Kent Beck
>> Three Rivers Institute
>>
>>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>

[Paul King]

Just for feedback. all of the Groovy JUnit 4.x examples from here:

http://groovy.codehaus.org/Using+JUnit+4+with+Groovy

ran without change with 4.5 beta 2. At the moment, the integration
only uses the runClasses() method from JUnitCore which doesn't seem
to have changed. I haven't explored whether the changed runMain()
methods would provider a better hook going forward.

Cheers, Paul.

Kent Beck wrote:

>
>
> All,
>
> We are nearing the release of JUnit 4.5. We have a question for all you
> custom runner writers out there. We have substantially restructured the
> internals of JUnit4TestRunner. Would you like the current version retained
> for at least one more release or shall we discard it?
>
> Regards,
>
> Kent Beck
> Three Rivers Institute
>

[David Saff]

Johannes,

As you port ClasspathSuite, be sure to take a look at the new
RunnerBuilder support (check out the RunWith javadocs for now).  Let
me know if that helps,

   David Saff

On Tue, Jun 10, 2008 at 3:55 PM, Johannes Link <jl@...> wrote:

> I vote for keeping it in for one more version. It relieves me from
> porting ClasspathSuite at once and from keeping two versions around
> till 4.5 will be the dominantly used version.
>
> thanks, Johannes
>
> --- In junit@..., "Kent Beck" <kentb@...> wrote:
>>
>> Nat,
>>
>> Yes, it is. That's the question: should we leave JUnit4TestRunner
> basically
>> alone and change the name of the new one to BlockTestRunner (all the
> various
>> annotations and variations are implemented as "statements" which are
>> assembled into a "block" to run the test instead of the hideously nested
>> procedure calls we had before)?
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Kent Beck
>> Three Rivers Institute
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>

[David Saff]

On Tue, Jul 1, 2008 at 9:01 AM, Paul King <paulk@...> wrote:
>
> Just for feedback. all of the Groovy JUnit 4.x examples from here:
>
> http://groovy.codehaus.org/Using+JUnit+4+with+Groovy
>
> ran without change with 4.5 beta 2.

Excellent (thanks again for the write-up, too.)

> At the moment, the integration
> only uses the runClasses() method from JUnitCore which doesn't seem
> to have changed. I haven't explored whether the changed runMain()
> methods would provider a better hook going forward.

Please stay with runClasses, and not runMain:

        /**
         * Do not use. Testing purposes only.
         * @param system
         */
        public Result runMain(JUnitSystem system, String... args) {

Thanks,

   David Saff