|
||||||||
|
This message is automatically generated by JIRA. If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators. For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira |
||||||||
- [jbehave-dev] [jira] (JBEHAVE-871) StepsBehavi... Volodymyr Sobotovych (JIRA)
- [jbehave-dev] [jira] (JBEHAVE-871) StepsB... Alexander Lehmann (JIRA)
- [jbehave-dev] [jira] (JBEHAVE-871) StepsB... Mauro Talevi (JIRA)
- [jbehave-dev] [jira] (JBEHAVE-871) StepsB... Volodymyr Sobotovych (JIRA)
- [jbehave-dev] [jira] (JBEHAVE-871) StepsB... Volodymyr Sobotovych (JIRA)
- [jbehave-dev] [jira] (JBEHAVE-871) StepsB... Volodymyr Sobotovych (JIRA)
- [jbehave-dev] [jira] (JBEHAVE-871) StepsB... Mauro Talevi (JIRA)
- [jbehave-dev] [jira] (JBEHAVE-871) StepsB... Mauro Talevi (JIRA)

I think I had a similar problem in another test class that assumed a specific order for the list of methods where I changed the unit test to look at all members of the array.
I think it would be correct just to fix the test as well, since there are no assumptions made on the order of methods when you actually run your methods (or there shouldn't be at least).