[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SUREFIRE-2147?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Geoff Soutter updated SUREFIRE-2147:
------------------------------------
Description:
h3. Description of the issue
I created a simple example of JUnit5 DynamicContainer/DynamicTest
{code:java}
package pkg;
import ...
public class JUnit5DynamicTest {
@TestFactory
Collection<DynamicNode> createDynamicTests() {
List<DynamicNode> folder2 = new ArrayList<>();
folder2.add(DynamicTest.dynamicTest("test1", new MyExecutable()));
folder2.add(DynamicTest.dynamicTest("test2", new MyExecutable()));
List<DynamicNode> folder1 = new ArrayList<>();
folder1.add(DynamicContainer.dynamicContainer("folder2", folder2));
List<DynamicNode> rootFolder = new ArrayList<>();
rootFolder.add(DynamicContainer.dynamicContainer("folder1", folder1));
return rootFolder;
}
private static class MyExecutable implements Executable {
@Override
public void execute() throws Throwable {
}
}
}
{code}
When I run this in IDEA. I get the following hierarchical structure in the UI
treeview
* JUnit5DynamicTest (pkg)
** createDynamicTests()
*** folder1
**** folder2
***** test1
***** test2
Here we can see that dynamic tests are represented by IDEA as nested children
of the test method. We can open and close the "virtual packages" created as
usual to explore in the dynamically created test results. It is not a "flat
list".
Using surefire 3.2.5 and JUnit5Xml30StatelessReporter, with the "phrased"
reported configuration disabled, it creates content in surefire-reports like so
{code}
<testcase name="createDynamicTests" classname="pkg.JUnit5DynamicTest"
time="0.012"/>
<testcase name="createDynamicTests" classname="pkg.JUnit5DynamicTest"
time="0.001"/>
{code}
In this case the Dynamic Tests are completely obscured, instead we get
duplicate reports for the @TestFactory method.
With the example "phrased" reporter configuration "use" properties enabled, we
get
{code:java}
<testcase name="folder2 folder1 createDynamicTests() test1"
classname="pkg.JUnit5DynamicTest" time="0.011"/>
<testcase name="folder2 folder1 createDynamicTests() test2"
classname="pkg.JUnit5DynamicTest" time="0.001"/>
{code}
Here all the Dynamic tests are created as synthetic "methods" of the physical
class in the HTML report, with the DynamicContainer and DynamicTest names
injected into the phrased "method" name.
>From the perspective of someone with a lot of dynamic tests in a huge folder
>structure, this is less than ideal as the nested structure is not exposed in
>the test report in a clean structure way, as it was with package names.
So how do the tools that process this XML into HTML reports handle it?
* should we be forced to enable phrased naming so that reporting tools can
access the dynamic folder and test names?
* assuming the above is true, how can reporting tools show the nested structure
of the DynamicFolders? Should they parse the phrased method name to find the
individual components?
Also the internal ordering seems inconsistent, if we expect the ordering
defined by heirarchy position then we would expect the folder/method names like
"createDynamicTest() folder1 folder2 test1".
h3. Solution Ideas
We have two ways to look at this, using non phrased method names, or phrased
method names.
h3. Non Phrased
Dynamic tests with non phrased method names are currently not usable. So
anything we do here would be an improvement.
So for non phrased method names, we could add the dynamic names as synthetic
child packages in the classname attribute.
That is, when mapping from DynamicTests to Java packages, we have:
|| Java Structure || Dynamic Test Structure ||
| package identifier | DynamicContainer name |
| class name | static placeholder (e.g. Tests) |
| method name | DynamicTest name |
I think we could do that by moving the method name and folder name from name=
into classname= and adding a static placeholder for the classname.
{code:java}
<testcase name="test1"
classname="pkg.JUnit5DynamicTest.createDynamicTests().folder1.folder2.Tests"/>
<testcase name="test2"
classname="pkg.JUnit5DynamicTest.createDynamicTests().folder1.folder2.Tests"/>
{code}
h3. Phrased
For phrased usage, its less obvious what to do. The nested structure is
injected into a single XML attribute and I haven't seen any documentation of
the internal structure of that attribute. The ordering looks inconsistent as it
is and possibly needs fixing. However, changing this value without any schema
as to what the contents mean seems to be dangerous.
Casual testing with an available Jenkins instance seems to indicate that
Jenkins JUnit already has some capability to parse the phrased method name as
it shows folder2 as a "package" (but folder1 is lost).
Getting an overall useful result here would mostly rely on fixes in the
downstream reporting tools.
was:
h3. Description of the issue
I created a simple example of JUnit5 DynamicContainer/DynamicTest
{code:java}
package pkg;
import ...
public class JUnit5DynamicTest {
@TestFactory
Collection<DynamicNode> createDynamicTests() {
List<DynamicNode> folder2 = new ArrayList<>();
folder2.add(DynamicTest.dynamicTest("test1", new MyExecutable()));
folder2.add(DynamicTest.dynamicTest("test2", new MyExecutable()));
List<DynamicNode> folder1 = new ArrayList<>();
folder1.add(DynamicContainer.dynamicContainer("folder2", folder2));
List<DynamicNode> rootFolder = new ArrayList<>();
rootFolder.add(DynamicContainer.dynamicContainer("folder1", folder1));
return rootFolder;
}
private static class MyExecutable implements Executable {
@Override
public void execute() throws Throwable {
}
}
}
{code}
When I run this in IDEA. I get the following hierarchical structure in the UI
treeview
* JUnit5DynamicTest (pkg)
** createDynamicTests()
*** folder1
**** folder2
***** test1
***** test2
Here we can see that dynamic tests are represented by IDEA as nested children
of the test method. We can open and close the "virtual packages" created as
usual to explore in the dynamically created test results. It is not a "flat
list".
Using surefire 3.2.5 and JUnit5Xml30StatelessReporter, with the "phrased"
reported configuration disabled, it creates content in surefire-reports like so
{code}
<testcase name="createDynamicTests" classname="pkg.JUnit5DynamicTest"
time="0.012"/>
<testcase name="createDynamicTests" classname="pkg.JUnit5DynamicTest"
time="0.001"/>
{code}
In this case the Dynamic Tests are completely obscured, instead we get
duplicate reports for the @TestFactory method.
With the example "phrased" reporter configuration "use" properties enabled, we
get
{code:java}
<testcase name="folder2 folder1 createDynamicTests() test1"
classname="pkg.JUnit5DynamicTest" time="0.011"/>
<testcase name="folder2 folder1 createDynamicTests() test2"
classname="pkg.JUnit5DynamicTest" time="0.001"/>
{code}
Here all the Dynamic tests are created as synthetic "methods" of the physical
class in the HTML report, with the DynamicContainer and DynamicTest names
injected into the phrased "method" name.
>From the perspective of someone with a lot of dynamic tests in a huge folder
>structure, this is less than ideal as the nested structure is not exposed in
>the test report in a clean structure way, as it was with package names.
So how do the tools that process this XML into HTML reports handle it?
* should we be forced to enable phrased naming so that reporting tools can
access the dynamic folder and test names?
* assuming the above is true, how can reporting tools show the nested structure
of the DynamicFolders? Should they parse the phrased method name to find the
individual components?
Also the internal ordering seems inconsistent, if we expect the ordering
defined by heirarchy position then we would expect the folder/method names like
"createDynamicTest() folder1 folder2 test1".
h3. Solution Ideas
We have two ways to look at this, using non phrased method names, or phrased
method names.
h3. Non Phrased
Dynamic tests with non phrased method names are currently not usable. So
anything we do here would be an improvement.
So for non phrased method names, we could add the dynamic names as synthetic
child packages in the classname attribute.
That is, when mapping from DynamicTests to Java packages, we have:
|| Java Structure || Dynamic Test Structure ||
| package identifier | DynamicContainer name |
| simple class name | static placeholder (e.g. Tests) |
| method name | DynamicTest name |
I think we could do that by moving the method name and folder name from name=
into classname= and adding a static placeholder for the classname.
{code:java}
<testcase name="test1"
classname="pkg.JUnit5DynamicTest.createDynamicTests().folder1.folder2.Tests"/>
<testcase name="test2"
classname="pkg.JUnit5DynamicTest.createDynamicTests().folder1.folder2.Tests"/>
{code}
h3. Phrased
For phrased usage, its less obvious what to do. The nested structure is
injected into a single XML attribute and I haven't seen any documentation of
the internal structure of that attribute. The ordering looks inconsistent as it
is and possibly needs fixing. However, changing this value without any schema
as to what the contents mean seems to be dangerous.
Casual testing with an available Jenkins instance seems to indicate that
Jenkins JUnit already has some capability to parse the phrased method name as
it shows folder2 as a "package" (but folder1 is lost).
Getting an overall useful result here would mostly rely on fixes in the
downstream reporting tools.
> JUnit5 DynamicContainer/DynamicTest report loses the hierarchical structure
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: SUREFIRE-2147
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SUREFIRE-2147
> Project: Maven Surefire
> Issue Type: Bug
> Affects Versions: 3.0.0-M7
> Reporter: Geoff Soutter
> Priority: Major
>
> h3. Description of the issue
> I created a simple example of JUnit5 DynamicContainer/DynamicTest
> {code:java}
> package pkg;
> import ...
> public class JUnit5DynamicTest {
> @TestFactory
> Collection<DynamicNode> createDynamicTests() {
> List<DynamicNode> folder2 = new ArrayList<>();
> folder2.add(DynamicTest.dynamicTest("test1", new MyExecutable()));
> folder2.add(DynamicTest.dynamicTest("test2", new MyExecutable()));
> List<DynamicNode> folder1 = new ArrayList<>();
> folder1.add(DynamicContainer.dynamicContainer("folder2", folder2));
> List<DynamicNode> rootFolder = new ArrayList<>();
> rootFolder.add(DynamicContainer.dynamicContainer("folder1", folder1));
> return rootFolder;
> }
> private static class MyExecutable implements Executable {
> @Override
> public void execute() throws Throwable {
> }
> }
> }
> {code}
> When I run this in IDEA. I get the following hierarchical structure in the UI
> treeview
> * JUnit5DynamicTest (pkg)
> ** createDynamicTests()
> *** folder1
> **** folder2
> ***** test1
> ***** test2
> Here we can see that dynamic tests are represented by IDEA as nested children
> of the test method. We can open and close the "virtual packages" created as
> usual to explore in the dynamically created test results. It is not a "flat
> list".
> Using surefire 3.2.5 and JUnit5Xml30StatelessReporter, with the "phrased"
> reported configuration disabled, it creates content in surefire-reports like
> so
> {code}
> <testcase name="createDynamicTests" classname="pkg.JUnit5DynamicTest"
> time="0.012"/>
> <testcase name="createDynamicTests" classname="pkg.JUnit5DynamicTest"
> time="0.001"/>
> {code}
> In this case the Dynamic Tests are completely obscured, instead we get
> duplicate reports for the @TestFactory method.
> With the example "phrased" reporter configuration "use" properties enabled,
> we get
> {code:java}
> <testcase name="folder2 folder1 createDynamicTests() test1"
> classname="pkg.JUnit5DynamicTest" time="0.011"/>
> <testcase name="folder2 folder1 createDynamicTests() test2"
> classname="pkg.JUnit5DynamicTest" time="0.001"/>
> {code}
> Here all the Dynamic tests are created as synthetic "methods" of the physical
> class in the HTML report, with the DynamicContainer and DynamicTest names
> injected into the phrased "method" name.
> From the perspective of someone with a lot of dynamic tests in a huge folder
> structure, this is less than ideal as the nested structure is not exposed in
> the test report in a clean structure way, as it was with package names.
> So how do the tools that process this XML into HTML reports handle it?
> * should we be forced to enable phrased naming so that reporting tools can
> access the dynamic folder and test names?
> * assuming the above is true, how can reporting tools show the nested
> structure of the DynamicFolders? Should they parse the phrased method name to
> find the individual components?
> Also the internal ordering seems inconsistent, if we expect the ordering
> defined by heirarchy position then we would expect the folder/method names
> like "createDynamicTest() folder1 folder2 test1".
> h3. Solution Ideas
> We have two ways to look at this, using non phrased method names, or phrased
> method names.
> h3. Non Phrased
> Dynamic tests with non phrased method names are currently not usable. So
> anything we do here would be an improvement.
> So for non phrased method names, we could add the dynamic names as synthetic
> child packages in the classname attribute.
> That is, when mapping from DynamicTests to Java packages, we have:
> || Java Structure || Dynamic Test Structure ||
> | package identifier | DynamicContainer name |
> | class name | static placeholder (e.g. Tests) |
> | method name | DynamicTest name |
>
> I think we could do that by moving the method name and folder name from name=
> into classname= and adding a static placeholder for the classname.
> {code:java}
> <testcase name="test1"
> classname="pkg.JUnit5DynamicTest.createDynamicTests().folder1.folder2.Tests"/>
> <testcase name="test2"
> classname="pkg.JUnit5DynamicTest.createDynamicTests().folder1.folder2.Tests"/>
> {code}
> h3. Phrased
> For phrased usage, its less obvious what to do. The nested structure is
> injected into a single XML attribute and I haven't seen any documentation of
> the internal structure of that attribute. The ordering looks inconsistent as
> it is and possibly needs fixing. However, changing this value without any
> schema as to what the contents mean seems to be dangerous.
> Casual testing with an available Jenkins instance seems to indicate that
> Jenkins JUnit already has some capability to parse the phrased method name as
> it shows folder2 as a "package" (but folder1 is lost).
> Getting an overall useful result here would mostly rely on fixes in the
> downstream reporting tools.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.20.10#820010)
