+1 perhaps we can start making a new release with all classes deprecated, and updating pom references to this. then it's easier to find it's usage and replace it when one touches a module. replacing all usages at once will be too tedious because the alternatives are not drop-in replacements.
stefan >-----Original Message----- >From: Konrad Windszus [mailto:konra...@gmx.de] >Sent: Thursday, September 28, 2017 1:03 PM >To: dev@sling.apache.org >Subject: Deprecate Commons Testing? > >Currently Commons Testing can be found in bundles/commons/testing >(https://github.com/apache/sling/tree/trunk/bundles/commons/testing) >although I would rather expect it below testing >(https://github.com/apache/sling/tree/trunk/testing) in SVN. >Apart from that library seems to be rather old and not too actively >maintained. For most of its classes there are nowadays better replacements: > >Package >1. o.a.s.commons.testing.integration: Rather either Teleporter or the >org.apache.sling.testing.clients should be used >2. o.a.s.commons.testing.jcr: jcr-mock should be used instead >3. o.a.s.commons.testing.junit: should be converted to rules >(org.apache.sling.testing.rules) >4. o.a.s.commons.testing.osgi: osgi-mock should be used instead >5. o.a.s.commons.testing.sling: sling-mock should be used instead >6. org.apache.sling.commons.testing.util: if really useful can maybe moved >to sling-mock as well > >Apart from that there are IMHO better alternatives for all those classes >available, there are certain limitations which are IMHO not easy to fix: > >1. o.a.s.commons.testing.jcr uses Jackrabbit 2 only and never Oak, that >means that the ITs are pretty far away from what we ship now in Sling. >2. o.a.s.commons.testing.jcr is currently not compatible with Java 9 >(https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SLING-7159) > >WDYT? >Should we add deprecation hints to all those classes pointing to the better >alternatives and spin a last release? > >Currently we have way too many alternatives when it comes to testing >support and focusing only on one way of doing things certainly helps to >reduce the maintenance effort. >The next candidate to deprecate would be Testing Tools... > >Konrad
