This is an automated email from the ASF dual-hosted git repository.

davsclaus pushed a commit to branch main
in repository https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf/camel.git


The following commit(s) were added to refs/heads/main by this push:
     new e30d012fb1dc chore: Remove test-visibility convention from AGENTS.md
e30d012fb1dc is described below

commit e30d012fb1dcee97e83180b6b59118f9596e0388
Author: Claus Ibsen <[email protected]>
AuthorDate: Tue Aug 25 17:37:28 2026 +0200

    chore: Remove test-visibility convention from AGENTS.md
    
    Remove the "Test Visibility: Drop `public` From Test Classes and Methods" 
section
    from AGENTS.md (CLAUDE.md is a symlink to it). Camel test classes have been 
public
    for ~20 years and essentially every existing test class in the codebase is 
public,
    so the convention fought the corpus it lived in and caused pointless style 
drift.
    It also had a growing thicket of undocumented exceptions, including that 
tests
    driven by the test-infra CamelContextExtension must stay public because 
Java 25
    throws IllegalAccessException on reflective invocation of package-private 
fixture
    methods — a gap that recently broke CI.
    
    Closes #25642
    
    Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 4.8 <[email protected]>
---
 AGENTS.md | 51 ---------------------------------------------------
 1 file changed, 51 deletions(-)

diff --git a/AGENTS.md b/AGENTS.md
index 93b6a3794e0b..0c2c1ef1aa48 100644
--- a/AGENTS.md
+++ b/AGENTS.md
@@ -251,57 +251,6 @@ await().atMost(10, TimeUnit.SECONDS).until(() -> 
mock.getReceivedCounter() >= 2)
 - Use `untilAsserted` or `until` with a clear predicate — do not replace a 
sleep with a
   busy-wait loop.
 
-### Test Visibility: Drop `public` From Test Classes and Methods
-
-JUnit 5 does **not** require test classes or test methods to be `public` — 
package-private
-(the default, no modifier) is sufficient and preferred. Removing the 
unnecessary `public`
-qualifier reduces visual noise and follows modern JUnit 5 conventions.
-
-**Examples:**
-
-```java
-// Preferred — package-private (no modifier):
-class MyComponentTest extends CamelTestSupport {
-    @Test
-    void testSendMessage() { ... }
-
-    @Override
-    protected RoutesBuilder createRouteBuilder() throws Exception {
-        return new RouteBuilder() {
-            @Override
-            public void configure() {   // stays public — overrides 
RouteBuilder.configure()
-                from("direct:start").to("mock:result");
-            }
-        };
-    }
-}
-
-// Avoid — unnecessary public:
-public class MyComponentTest extends CamelTestSupport {
-    @Test
-    public void testSendMessage() { ... }
-}
-```
-
-**Rules:**
-
-- New test classes and test methods MUST NOT use the `public` modifier.
-- When modifying an existing test file, remove the `public` modifier from the 
class declaration
-  and from any test methods you touch. Do NOT sweep the entire file — only 
change what you are
-  already modifying.
-- `@BeforeAll`, `@AfterAll`, `@BeforeEach` and `@AfterEach` methods follow the 
same rule: drop
-  `public` when adding or modifying them.
-- **Exception — methods that override or implement a supertype method keep the 
supertype's
-  visibility.** Java forbids reducing visibility on an override (JLS 8.4.8.3), 
so
-  `public void configure()` in a `RouteBuilder`, and any override of a public 
method from
-  `CamelTestSupport` or an implemented interface, MUST stay `public`.
-- **Exception — base and support classes stay `public`** when they are 
extended from another
-  package or module (a package-private class cannot be), and anything under
-  `components/camel-test/**` or `test-infra/**` stays `public` because those 
are released
-  artifacts consumed by downstream projects and by users' own tests.
-- Do NOT create a standalone PR solely to remove `public` from test files in 
bulk — apply the
-  convention incrementally as part of other work.
-
 ### Issue Investigation (Before Implementation)
 
 Before implementing a fix for a JIRA issue, **thoroughly investigate** the 
issue's validity and context.

Reply via email to