#590 bugzilla rest connector #592
Conversation
| <booleanAttribute key="org.eclipse.jdt.junit.KEEPRUNNING_ATTR" value="false"/> | ||
| <stringAttribute key="org.eclipse.jdt.junit.TESTNAME" value=""/> | ||
| <stringAttribute key="org.eclipse.jdt.junit.TEST_KIND" value="org.eclipse.jdt.junit.loader.junit4"/> | ||
| <booleanAttribute key="org.eclipse.jdt.launching.ATTR_ATTR_USE_ARGFILE" value="false"/> | ||
| <booleanAttribute key="org.eclipse.jdt.launching.ATTR_SHOW_CODEDETAILS_IN_EXCEPTION_MESSAGES" value="true"/> | ||
| <booleanAttribute key="org.eclipse.jdt.launching.ATTR_USE_START_ON_FIRST_THREAD" value="true"/> | ||
| <stringAttribute key="org.eclipse.jdt.launching.JRE_CONTAINER" value="org.eclipse.jdt.launching.JRE_CONTAINER/org.eclipse.jdt.internal.launching.macosx.MacOSXType/OpenJDK 17.0.4 [17.0.4]"/> | ||
| <stringAttribute key="org.eclipse.jdt.launching.MAIN_TYPE" value=""/> | ||
| <stringAttribute key="org.eclipse.jdt.launching.JRE_CONTAINER" value="org.eclipse.jdt.launching.JRE_CONTAINER/org.eclipse.jdt.internal.launching.macosx.MacOSXType/OpenJDK 21.0.3 [21.0.3]"/> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Jenkins builds are with 17. I think we should use the same version both locally and remote.
Given that 24-09 compiler level defaults to 21 (or was it 22) do we stay with 17? What are the expectations for staying with 17?
| @@ -128,12 +128,14 @@ public AbstractTestFixture getActualFixture() { | |||
| } | |||
|
|
|||
| @Test | |||
| @ConditionalIgnoreRule.ConditionalIgnore(condition = MustRunOnCIServerRule.class) | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I would prefer going straight to JUnit5 end @EnabledIf instead, like I did with #589
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yes, we can do that. BugzillaRest Connector is special because we use here a Junit4TestFixtureRunner with a BlockJUnit4ClassRunner to group the unit test per fixture.
Have you the migration of the BugzillaRest Connector on your list or should I do this because I implement the Connector?
|
I want to replace JUnit 4 with 5 everywhere. I can do it. |
That is up to you. If you prefer we can merge this pull request. Otherwise we can continue or close the pull request. Without the changes in this branch we already have the Rule MustRunOnApikeyRule |
|
I'll make the changes in this branch |
| <booleanAttribute key="org.eclipse.jdt.junit.KEEPRUNNING_ATTR" value="false"/> | ||
| <stringAttribute key="org.eclipse.jdt.junit.TESTNAME" value=""/> | ||
| <stringAttribute key="org.eclipse.jdt.junit.TEST_KIND" value="org.eclipse.jdt.junit.loader.junit4"/> | ||
| <booleanAttribute key="org.eclipse.jdt.launching.ATTR_ATTR_USE_ARGFILE" value="false"/> | ||
| <booleanAttribute key="org.eclipse.jdt.launching.ATTR_SHOW_CODEDETAILS_IN_EXCEPTION_MESSAGES" value="true"/> | ||
| <booleanAttribute key="org.eclipse.jdt.launching.ATTR_USE_START_ON_FIRST_THREAD" value="true"/> | ||
| <stringAttribute key="org.eclipse.jdt.launching.JRE_CONTAINER" value="org.eclipse.jdt.launching.JRE_CONTAINER/org.eclipse.jdt.internal.launching.macosx.MacOSXType/OpenJDK 17.0.4 [17.0.4]"/> | ||
| <stringAttribute key="org.eclipse.jdt.launching.MAIN_TYPE" value=""/> | ||
| <stringAttribute key="org.eclipse.jdt.launching.JRE_CONTAINER" value="org.eclipse.jdt.launching.JRE_CONTAINER/org.eclipse.jdt.internal.launching.macosx.MacOSXType/OpenJDK 21.0.3 [21.0.3]"/> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Also is specific to the one environment. Something like JavaSE-21 would be better
|
Actually, thinking about it. It's probably better to create a new branch using #51 for the work. |
Yes, if you feel more comfortable with the new Brach, that's fine, especially because these tests are already available as junit4 and they run under jUnit 5 |
|
Hmm, just tried with the vintage library with no luck. Can you merge your PRs then? |
Bugzilla Rest Connector is not really productive so we can use the connector to demo how we can implement a rule to ignore tests if not in a CI Server environment.