New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Replace Upstream Test Code With Dependency #6
Comments
I asked for an update yesterday and Marc replied as this
So we can remove the classes |
Great, lets do that! |
And thanks for following up on this! 👍 |
I realize right now that I never considered whether Marc's answer applies to what we specifically are doing with the internal API. Did you give this a try? Maybe we should. :) If you didn't and don't want to, we can do it tomorrow on stream. |
We gave this a try and it looks like the API does everything we need. I'll merge #210 momentarily and then we can get to work on this. I created a proof of concept in issues/6-testkit-api. Let's do it as follows:
|
In 0b79db8 (#6 / #218), we moved all assertion-like methods onto the `ExecutionResults` class even though that wasn't a good fit. The intention was to collect all such methods to then more easily replace them with proper AssertJ-like assertions that we needed to write ourselves. This change implements these methods. The API is pretty good already, but we expect that after using it for a while the experience with it as well as new use cases may lead to further changes (see #298). Closes: #232 PR: #245
#4 enabled tests to be written like in JUnit 5. Part of the implementation copy-pasted a bunch of classes from the project (see f613211 for reasons). As soon as JUnit publishes test artifacts (see junit-team/junit5#572) a proper dependency can be established and the class can be removed.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: