Fixes #2510: Remove ExpectedException from internal test suite

[temp-droid]

Checklist

• Read the contributing guide
• PR should be motivated, i.e. what does it fix, why, and if relevant how
• If possible / relevant include an example in the description, that could help all readers
  including project members to get a better picture of the change
• Avoid other runtime dependencies
• Meaningful commit history ; intention is important please rebase your commit history so that each
  commit is meaningful and help the people that will explore a change in 2 years
• The pull request follows coding style
• Mention Fixes #<issue number> in the description if relevant
• At least one commit should mention Fixes #<issue number> if relevant

[codecov-commenter]

Codecov Report

Merging #2518 (dc2231c) into main (95bc5b2) will not change coverage.
The diff coverage is n/a.

❗ Current head dc2231c differs from pull request most recent head 367fb12. Consider uploading reports for the commit 367fb12 to get more accurate results

@@            Coverage Diff            @@
##               main    #2518   +/-   ##
=========================================
  Coverage     86.66%   86.66%           
  Complexity     2781     2781           
=========================================
  Files           320      320           
  Lines          8344     8344           
  Branches       1022     1022           
=========================================
  Hits           7231     7231           
  Misses          842      842           
  Partials        271      271           

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
src/main/java/org/mockito/Mockito.java	92.20% <0.00%> (ø)

---

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 95bc5b2...367fb12. Read the comment docs.

[temp-droid]

Hey @TimvdLippe!

Outside one ExpectedException case in SpyAnnotationTest that I'm unsure of (not used in the past?) and one @Test(expected… in the osgi-test I'm not confortable touching, the rest should be replaced.

Before continuing replacing the try fail finally cases, I wanted to check with you if it wouldn't be best to create another PR for those. We are already at 72 commits for this one and I counted more than 380 occurrences in ~120 files for fail().

I feel like this would be too much to review in a single PR, but you tell me.

[TimvdLippe]

Yes. This PR is already massive, so let's cut it here. I hope to have time on Friday to review. Thanks for your effort!

Note that in this case I am okay with so many commits, since it is mechanical. However, for other PRs let's try to keep them small 😄

[temp-droid]

Do you have suggestions how to approach the new PR? First creating an issue to link it to? Or referencing the same one?

I'm afraid it might create confusion to have 2 PRs for the same issue qua closing.

[TimvdLippe]

Let's file a new issue for that. Thanks!

[TimvdLippe]

Thanks for the cleanup!