Seems trappy to not allow BlahTests.class though. What about some kind of precommit test? I can imagine some rules about naming of abstract classes to avoid running them. But that's hacky too; if I name an abstract class AbstractBlahTest, wouldn't it get run with the current rules?
Erick On Mar 5, 2016 14:15, "Shawn Heisey" <[email protected]> wrote: > On 3/4/2016 4:28 PM, Erick Erickson wrote: > > > > Oh my! Can't look now, but if I'm not missing something, I'd vote for > > changing the pattern to include *Tests... > > > > I discovered that there's an abstract class in SolrJ named > "SolrExampleTests" that fails with the new pattern added. It fails > because it's abstract. I did not check whether there were any classes > elsewhere in the codebase that would fit this pattern -- I was playing > around in SolrJ. > > Anshum did commit a pattern change, but after I discovered the above > problem, opted to rename the test instead of changing the patterns. > > Thanks, > Shawn > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > >
