The tests that depend on containers don't work well in containerized CI/CD
pipelines. I'd use a container for a test only if there are no other
alternatives.

Regards,
Domenico

On Fri, 26 Sept 2025 at 07:28, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <[email protected]> wrote:

> For context, here's the example of using TestContainers with reusable
> container: you just define this URL on a datasource:
>
> jdbc:tc:mysql:8.0.36:///databasename?TC_REUSABLE=true
>
> tc == test container
>
> Then, the testcontainer can use the same MySQL container across all
> tests using this URL.
>
> Just fyi :)
>
> Regards
> JB
>
> On Fri, Sep 26, 2025 at 12:09 AM Arthur Naseef <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> >
> > I agree on TestContainers.  There are ways to work around the lack of a
> > straight-forward lifecycle fit for TestContainers, but we can do well
> with
> > the docker-maven-plugin instead.
> >
> > And personally, I think it is fine for the tests to require docker.
> >
> > Art
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Sep 25, 2025 at 3:12 AM Clebert Suconic <
> [email protected]>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Docker is an option, but I don't think TestContainers would be a good
> > > option. I would rather use a real docker and reuse the database among
> > > the whole testsuite (with proper cleanups in between each test).
> > > TestContainer means start the database for each test... that can be
> > > brutal.
> > >
> > > On Thu, Sep 25, 2025 at 12:56 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré <[email protected]
> >
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Hi
> > > >
> > > > Thanks for your message Clebert.
> > > >
> > > > We are not in the rush but worth to explore the alternatives.
> > > >
> > > > I think we have two options (for both Artemis and Classic):
> > > > 1. Find another file db like h2
> > > > 2. Use test containers
> > > >
> > > > My preference is for 2 as the tests should be more accurate using a
> > > “real”
> > > > database.
> > > >
> > > > But again, we have time to prepare this change: even if the project
> is
> > > > retired, the artifacts are still there (it means that we won’t have
> new
> > > > versions and maintenance but it gives us time).
> > > >
> > > > Regards
> > > > JB
> > > >
> > > > Le mer. 24 sept. 2025 à 21:03, Clebert Suconic <
> > > [email protected]>
> > > > a écrit :
> > > >
> > > > > I saw a discussion today about Derby retiring...
> > > > >
> > > > > We still use it as part of our testsuites, both on ActiveMQ
> "Classic"
> > > > > and "Artemis"...
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > I wonder what should we do about this? Should we let it retire,
> should
> > > > > we still use it as read-only (as its a good tool for testing), or
> > > > > should we ask them to keep it alive?
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > If we let it retire, what would we replace it with?
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > Clebert Suconic
> > > > >
> > > > >
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
> > > > > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
> > > > > For further information, visit:
> https://activemq.apache.org/contact
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Clebert Suconic
> > >
> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
> > > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
> > > For further information, visit: https://activemq.apache.org/contact
> > >
> > >
> > >
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
> For further information, visit: https://activemq.apache.org/contact
>
>
>

Reply via email to