openjpa-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Donald Woods <>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] refactor @AllowFailure
Date Mon, 06 Apr 2009 16:46:38 GMT
Mike, after thinking about this some more, I guess there are 2 different 
test needs here -
1) allow some tests to be skipped due to a boolean condition (like if 
the test is running on DB2), which OPENJPA-998 provides via the @Ignore 
2) convert the surefire excludes list in pom.xml into annotations, via 
an @Optional or similar system property, as you suggest below and could 
use OPENJPA-949 for the JIRA work.

I support renaming @AllowFailure to something like @Optional which uses 
a system property as the default activator.  Besides the default 
all/true or none/false conditions, we could also support a 
package/classname value like -
to allow running a subset of the normally excluded tests.

I would also check the @Optional annotation before the @Ignore 
annotation, so these non-normal tests will be skipped before the 
conditional code (usually in setup()) is run for the @Ignore.


Donald Woods wrote:
> I would rather see us use a Junit v4 annotation like @Ignore as provided 
> via OPENJPA-998 (which just needs someone to review and commit it...)
> /**
>  * Signals to the harness to ignore the annotated test.
>  *
>  */
> @Target({TYPE, METHOD})
> @Retention(RUNTIME)
> public @interface Ignore {
>     boolean value() default true;
>     String message() default "";
> }
> After the above is added, the @AllowFailure support can be removed and 
> the updated to look for @Ignore by default.
> -Donald
> Michael Dick wrote:
>> Hi all,
>> The AllowFailure annotation is very useful in that it allows specific 
>> test
>> methods to be ignored during a typical Maven build.
>> The implementation, however is rather confusing as a "clean" build of
>> OpenJPA will typically contain several stack traces from exceptions. 
>> Running
>> these optional tests that currently do not pass just consumes CPU cycles
>> that could be better spent elsewhere.
>> I propose refactoring @AllowFailure to be called @OptionalTest (or just
>> @Optional) and updating the supporting methods in PersistenceTestCase so
>> that test methods (or classes) annotated with @OptionalTest are skipped
>> unless a jvm system property is true (ie -Dopenjpa.optional.tests=true).
>> I think this will save everyone's CPU cycles without violating the 
>> intent of
>> @AllowFailure. In addition with this change we could resurrect the 
>> changes
>> for OPENJPA-770 and we could clean up the root pom.xml a bit.
>> Anyone else have strong opinions about @AllowFailure?
>> -mike

View raw message