Hello. Le jeu. 17 févr. 2022 à 16:18, Gary Gregory <garydgreg...@gmail.com> a écrit : > > Well, it is explicitly in the sense that I would guess that 95% of the test > methods in Commons follows that style and that one our documented > guidelines is "follow the style of the file you are editing".
When migrating to the newer Junit, the "same style" rule is intentionally broken; hence it is *not* obvious that one should not also change the method name. It certainly would not hurt to add a sentence to that effect, and it would avoid repeating ourselves. Gilles > > Gary > > On Thu, Feb 17, 2022, 09:16 Gilles Sadowski <gillese...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Hello. > > > > Le jeu. 17 févr. 2022 à 13:11, Gary Gregory <garydgreg...@gmail.com> a > > écrit : > > > > > > I have encountered what Sebb mentions more than once, I do like the > > "test" > > > prefix to make it obvious what is and is not intended to be a test. Same > > > reason I like to make test methods public: clear intent. I know Junit 5 > > > proposes to change these conventions, the benefit do not outweigh the > > > convention we use in Commons today for me. > > > > OK. > > But shouldn't we make that explicit somewhere (or is it already?), in > > order to let people know that we considered it and made a choice, > > (thus reducing the chance that a contribution is based on another > > convention that's perhaps becoming more natural for new developers)? > > > > Thanks, > > Gilles > > > > > > > [...] --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
