Sounds ok to me. I was trying to maintain it since it existed before,
but it's clearly not used in a useful way.
On 24/11/2007, at 10:29 AM, Dan Fabulich wrote:
>
> SUREFIRE-47 points out, correctly, that we're running the suite()
> method twice: once to count the tests, and then again when the
> tests actually run.
>
> http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/SUREFIRE-47
>
> This happens in JUnitTestSet; what's strange is that we don't do
> this in TestNGTestSet. "getTestCount()" simply returns 1 in that
> case, with a TODO "need to get this from TestNG somehow". This is
> filed as SUREFIRE-94; it's minor, because "this isn't required for
> correct operation of the tests, but may be if a reporter relies on
> the correct number in the runStarting method (currently, it is
> unused)."
>
> If so, why do we count the tests initially at all? I just tried
> ripping out all implementations of getTestCount() and just adding 1
> to totalTests whenever we would have called it. It doesn't seem to
> have done any harm; the only difference I can see is that in the
> case where you've got some classes that look like tests, we do
> "execute" the test run, but when we find no tests, the summary
> banner says:
>
> Tests run: 0, Failures: 0, Errors: 0, Skipped: 0
>
> ... instead of:
>
> No tests to run.
>
> (It still says "No tests to run" when there are no JUnit classes at
> all.)
>
> Therefore, I'm inclined to fix SUREFIRE-47 by ripping out
> getTestCount() from the SurefireTestSet interface and removing its
> implementation from JUnitTestSet, PojoTestSet and TestNGTestSet.
>
> Does anyone object to this?
>
> -Dan
--
Brett Porter - brett@apache.org
Blog: http://www.devzuz.org/blogs/bporter/
|