Hey Sahoo, sorry for the short reply at first.
hmm.. i kind of guessed that. But regarding options i am kind of thinking the other way around: less implicits, less magic behind the scenes. With Pax Exam 3 we are thinking into detaching Pax Exam from the OSGi-only scenario widening the use case to general in-container testing. With that in mind, we should be sensible with default options. Toni On Fri, Jan 13, 2012 at 11:13 AM, Sanjeeb Sahoo <[email protected]> wrote: > junitBundles() if I understood your question correctly. > > > On Fri, Jan 13, 2012 at 3:31 PM, Toni Menzel <[email protected]> wrote: > >> For example ? >> >> On Fri, Jan 13, 2012 at 1:48 AM, Sanjeeb Sahoo <[email protected]>wrote: >> >>> I was wondering if it it makes sense for JUnit4TestRunner to >>> automatically add junit related options if they are not provided by user. >>> Comments? >>> >>> Sahoo >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> general mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> http://lists.ops4j.org/mailman/listinfo/general >>> >>> >> >> >> -- >> Toni Menzel Source <http://tonimenzel.com> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> general mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://lists.ops4j.org/mailman/listinfo/general >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > general mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.ops4j.org/mailman/listinfo/general > > -- Toni Menzel Source <http://tonimenzel.com>
_______________________________________________ general mailing list [email protected] http://lists.ops4j.org/mailman/listinfo/general
