There’s a JUnit annotation `@Issue` or something like that (Spock has a similar annotation) which you can use for linking to an issue. Otherwise, adding `@Tag` annotations allows for arbitrary tags (of which we use several already such as “functional” and “sleepy”).
> On Nov 28, 2023, at 5:55 AM, Gary Gregory <garydgreg...@gmail.com> wrote: > > I think JUnit can group tests in categories with annotations (AFK). > > Gary > > On Tue, Nov 28, 2023, 12:01 AM Ralph Goers <ralph.go...@dslextreme.com> > wrote: > >> I would be -1 if the issues are going to be ignored or not tracked in any >> way. I don’t know if GitHub has something like a Jira Epic or if they can >> be tagged in some way so that they can be easily located but something like >> that would be fine. Even tracking them in Confluence would be fine. >> >> It would also be great if only the failing tests could be run under a >> profile making it easy to fix them. >> >> Hopefully you get what I mean. I am not looking for something complicated, >> just a way to make it easy to find them when someone has the urge to fix >> them. >> >> Ralph >> >>> On Nov 27, 2023, at 3:28 AM, Volkan Yazıcı <vol...@yazi.ci> wrote: >>> >>> Ralph did not agree, but did not strongly object either. Ralph, are you >> -1 >>> on disabling tests only Windows that are failing frequently on Windows >> and >>> capturing them in tickets to be addressed? >>> >>> On Thu, Nov 23, 2023 at 12:23 AM Christian Grobmeier < >> grobme...@apache.org> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Ralph said, nobody would ever fix these tests if you do it like this. I >>>> think you should create the ticket but keep the tests until we find the >>>> issue. Otherwise there issues will rot >>>> >>>> On Wed, Nov 22, 2023, at 09:13, Volkan Yazıcı wrote: >>>>> AFAIC, nobody[1] shows a strong opposition against the idea of >> disabling >>>>> frequently failing Windows tests only on Windows and creating a ticket >>>> for >>>>> each one. I will proceed with that. >>>>> >>>>> [1] Except Piotr, whom I discussed the issue with in Slack and he >> agreed >>>>> with the above shared approach. >>>>> >>>>> On Mon, Nov 20, 2023 at 12:57 PM Volkan Yazıcı <vol...@yazi.ci> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> I am not asking to disable Windows tests. I am asking to disable tests >>>>>> and only those tests that have a failure rate on Windows higher than, >>>>>> say, 30%. To be precise, I think there are 2-3 of them dealing with >>>>>> network sockets and rolling file appenders. I am not talking about >>>>>> dozens or such. >>>>>> >>>>>> After disabling them, we can create a ticket referencing them. So that >>>>>> interested parties can fix them. >>>>>> >>>>>> On Mon, Nov 20, 2023 at 12:25 PM Piotr P. Karwasz >>>>>> <piotr.karw...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Hi Volkan, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Mon, 20 Nov 2023 at 09:36, Volkan Yazıcı <vol...@yazi.ci> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> As Gary (the only Windows user among the active Log4j maintainers, >>>>>>>> AFAIK) has noticed several times, Log4j tests on Windows are pretty >>>>>>>> unstable. It not only fails on Gary's laptop, but Piotr and I need >>>> to >>>>>>>> give Windows tests in CI a kick on a regular basis. Approximately >>>> one >>>>>>>> out of three CI runs fails on Windows. Piotr already improved the >>>>>>>> situation extensively, though there are still several leftovers that >>>>>>>> need attention. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Unless somebody steps up to improve the unstable Windows tests, I >>>>>>>> would like to disable those only for the WIndows platform. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Please don't. Windows has an annoying file locking policy that >>>>>>> prevents users from deleting files with open file descriptors, but >>>>>>> that is one of the few ways to detect resource leakage we have. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Tests running on *NIXes will ignore problems with open file >>>>>>> descriptors and delete the log files, but on a production system >> those >>>>>>> leaks will accumulate and cause application crashes. We had such a >>>>>>> leak, when we used `URLConnection#getLastModified` on a `jar:...` >> URL. >>>>>>> This call caused file descriptor exhaustion on both Windows and >>>>>>> *NIXes, but only the Windows test was able to detect it. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Piotr, >>>>>>> who never thought would ever defend Microsoft Windows. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> PS: Gary reports the failures, but always runs the build again until >>>>>>> it succeeds, even on Friday 13th, when he had to wait until Saturday >>>>>>> 14th for the test run to succeed. >>>>>> >>>> >> >>
