[
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".
However, things are not as good when using surefire as it still uses the years
old ant XSD for XML reporting and that XSD doesn't support anything apart from
basic Java usage, certainly nothing like dynamic tests which don't correspond
directly to a java class and method name,
Using surefire 3.2.5 and JUnit5Xml30StatelessReporter, with the "phrased"
reported configuration disabled, it creates XML report 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 (eg
Jenkins JUnit plugin).
* should surefire uses be forced to enable phrased naming so that reporting
tools can access the dynamic folder and test names?
* how can XML reporting tools show the nested structure of the DynamicFolders?
** can XML reporting tools easily tell whether the XML was generated with
phrased or non phrased settings? Should they need to?
** if using phrased, should they parse the phrased name attribute to find the
dynamic folder and test names?
** if using non phrased, is there a way of surefire safely injecting the
dynamic folder and test names into an existing attribute which will work in a
backwards compatible way with the XML reporting tools?
Also the internal ordering of the phrased name attribute seems inconsistent, or
at least I don't understand it. Since "test" is inside "folder1", surely
"folder1" and "test" should be next to each other rather than at opposite ends
of the value? If we expect ordering by heirarchy position then we would expect
the folder/method names like "createDynamicTest() folder1 folder2 test1".
h3. Solution Ideas
Perhaps one day https://github.com/ota4j-team/open-test-reporting will be
supported as XML report format and at that point, I guess support for dynamic
tests would be easy to add. However that could be years off, if at all.
Anyway, back to the real world, Surefire using the old ant XSD has two variants
of the XML report, using non phrased method names, or phrased method names.
Dynamic tests don't have a non phrased name. So its not really clear to me what
the distinction between phrased and non phrased names means for Dynamic tests.
Nevertheless, phrased and non phrased is what Surefire is designed for, so we
have to come up with something.
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
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).
To get an overall useful result here I guess we'd need to
* create and publish some kind of docs / schema on the internal structure we
want to support for downstream reporting tools
* adjust whatever output we have now to meet the docs/schema, if required
* wait for downstream reporting tools to support it
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".
However, things are not as good when using surefire as it still uses the years
old ant XSD for XML reporting and that XSD doesn't support anything apart from
basic Java usage, certainly nothing like dynamic tests which don't correspond
directly to a java class and method name,
Using surefire 3.2.5 and JUnit5Xml30StatelessReporter, with the "phrased"
reported configuration disabled, it creates XML report 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 (eg
Jenkins JUnit plugin).
* should surefire uses be forced to enable phrased naming so that reporting
tools can access the dynamic folder and test names?
* how can XML reporting tools show the nested structure of the DynamicFolders?
** can XML reporting tools easily tell whether the XML was generated with
phrased or non phrased settings? Should they need to?
** if using phrased, should they parse the phrased name attribute to find the
dynamic folder and test names?
** if using non phrased, is there a way of surefire safely injecting the
dynamic folder and test names into an existing attribute which will work in a
backwards compatible way with the XML reporting tools?
Also the internal ordering of the phrased name attribute seems inconsistent, or
at least I don't understand the ordering. Surely folder1 should come before
folder2 If we expect ordering by heirarchy position then we would expect the
folder/method names like "createDynamicTest() folder1 folder2 test1".
h3. Solution Ideas
Perhaps one day https://github.com/ota4j-team/open-test-reporting will be
supported as XML report format and at that point, I guess support for dynamic
tests would be easy to add. However that could be years off, if at all.
Anyway, back to the real world, Surefire using the old ant XSD has two variants
of the XML report, using non phrased method names, or phrased method names.
Dynamic tests don't have a non phrased name. So its not really clear to me what
the distinction between phrased and non phrased names means for Dynamic tests.
Nevertheless, phrased and non phrased is what Surefire is designed for, so we
have to come up with something.
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
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).
To get an overall useful result here I guess we'd need to
* create and publish some kind of docs / schema on the internal structure we
want to support for downstream reporting tools
* adjust whatever output we have now to meet the docs/schema, if required
* wait for downstream reporting tools to support it
> 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, 3.2.5
> 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".
> However, things are not as good when using surefire as it still uses the
> years old ant XSD for XML reporting and that XSD doesn't support anything
> apart from basic Java usage, certainly nothing like dynamic tests which don't
> correspond directly to a java class and method name,
> Using surefire 3.2.5 and JUnit5Xml30StatelessReporter, with the "phrased"
> reported configuration disabled, it creates XML report 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 (eg
> Jenkins JUnit plugin).
> * should surefire uses be forced to enable phrased naming so that reporting
> tools can access the dynamic folder and test names?
> * how can XML reporting tools show the nested structure of the
> DynamicFolders?
> ** can XML reporting tools easily tell whether the XML was generated with
> phrased or non phrased settings? Should they need to?
> ** if using phrased, should they parse the phrased name attribute to find the
> dynamic folder and test names?
> ** if using non phrased, is there a way of surefire safely injecting the
> dynamic folder and test names into an existing attribute which will work in a
> backwards compatible way with the XML reporting tools?
> Also the internal ordering of the phrased name attribute seems inconsistent,
> or at least I don't understand it. Since "test" is inside "folder1", surely
> "folder1" and "test" should be next to each other rather than at opposite
> ends of the value? If we expect ordering by heirarchy position then we would
> expect the folder/method names like "createDynamicTest() folder1 folder2
> test1".
> h3. Solution Ideas
> Perhaps one day https://github.com/ota4j-team/open-test-reporting will be
> supported as XML report format and at that point, I guess support for dynamic
> tests would be easy to add. However that could be years off, if at all.
> Anyway, back to the real world, Surefire using the old ant XSD has two
> variants of the XML report, using non phrased method names, or phrased method
> names.
> Dynamic tests don't have a non phrased name. So its not really clear to me
> what the distinction between phrased and non phrased names means for Dynamic
> tests. Nevertheless, phrased and non phrased is what Surefire is designed
> for, so we have to come up with something.
> 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
> 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).
> To get an overall useful result here I guess we'd need to
> * create and publish some kind of docs / schema on the internal structure we
> want to support for downstream reporting tools
> * adjust whatever output we have now to meet the docs/schema, if required
> * wait for downstream reporting tools to support it
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.20.10#820010)
