Doorgaan naar hoofdcontent

Junit 5 never runs in maven

We've had it so, so often.

Junit 5 is a bitch to run in maven. First there were issues with the surefire plugin. Make sure that is updated.

Then there were issues with the versions you need to use together.

Whelp, that was all set up right. And of course... still no junit 5


A fun thing was seeing this:


[INFO] --- maven-surefire-plugin:3.1.2:test (default-test) @ my-project ---
[INFO] Using auto detected provider org.apache.maven.surefire.junit4.JUnit4Provider

 

Yeah, that's not how it should go. This forces the junit 4 provider... Which is not the junit 5 generic one.
After a lot of digging, it turns out that surefire determines which provider to use... through some magic from the classpath. Of course, nowhere is there a junit4 dependency. They're all gone.

Well... Except...

Except...
The platform dependency

 

<dependency>
<groupId>org.junit.platform</groupId>
<artifactId>junit-platform-launcher</artifactId>
<version>${platform.version}</version>
<scope>test</scope>
</dependency>
<dependency>
<groupId>org.junit.platform</groupId>
<artifactId>junit-platform-runner</artifactId>
<version>${platform.version}</version>
<scope>test</scope>
</dependency>
That turned out to be the culprit. That was using an old version. And apparently, surefire triggers on that.
With that removed it gave:
[INFO] --- maven-surefire-plugin:3.1.2:test (default-test) @ sam-jar ---
[INFO] Using auto detected provider org.apache.maven.surefire.junitplatform.JUnitPlatformProvider
 
 And then, finally, it started running junit5 tests

And I could finally go to bed again. 

Reacties

Een reactie posten

Populaire posts van deze blog

Spring's conditional annotation with properties

Spring has a nice @Conditional annotation, to have the option to have beans be available in the context depending a specific condition (Of course, this can also be realized by using @Configuration objects, but that's a different post). Ideally, we'd have the option to have a condition evaluate to true or false depending on a property. Sadly, Spring does not support that out of the box. Googling and looking around gives a partial solution, but the complete one here, so we won't forget: /** * Components annotated with ConditionalOnProperty will be registered in the spring context depending on the value of a * property defined in the propertiesBeanName properties Bean. */ @Target({ ElementType.TYPE, ElementType.METHOD }) @Retention(RetentionPolicy.RUNTIME) @Conditional(OnPropertyCondition.class) public @interface ConditionalOnProperty { /** * The name of the property. If not found, it will evaluate to false. */ String value(); /** * if the p...
Een reactie posten
Meer lezen

OSGI insights without sonar

So I was on a project without sonar. Oh my. Well, it was an OSGI project, so the problems couldn't be that bad, right? But how good were they (and what things were bad?) I found Stan4j , a code analysis tool for eclipse, which draws nice graphs and can handle osgi pretty well it seems. Now I can see that dependencies/bundle names aren't properly aligned (even though OSGI doesn't complain), etc.
Een reactie posten
Meer lezen

JPA and transactions

So I was working with JPA and transactions. Consider the following: In bean 1, with implicit TX 1, managed entities are loaded/created,and returned in bean 2, with implicit TX 2, entities are modified in bean 3, with NO TX, bean 1 is called, and the results are passed to bean 2. and bean 4 is similar to bean 3, but with it's own transaction, TX3 What happens when bean 3 finishes: are the entities updated? What happens when bean 4 finishes, are the entities updated? The answer to this is simple; entities are managed through a persistance context. That context is tied to the transaction. So in bean 2, there is a difference. When called from bean 3, it runs in a different transaction then bean 1, and thus a different persistance context, and thus the entities are not managed 'by this transaction'.When called from bean 4, it all runs in the same transaction, TX3, and the results are persisted.
Een reactie posten
Meer lezen