Interesting question, I have just been manually transforming the nunit
output to look like the junit. However if we could squeeze nunit into a
surefire provider, that would be that much better.
When you are building the same component in java and C#, these
inconsistencies are very noticeable, so it would be great to have both
platforms build output consistent.
I will look into a nunit surefire provider.
Thanks,
Evan
On 6/4/07, Brett Porter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I question I'd been meaning to ask - is it possible to fit nunit in
as a surefire provider instead of a separate plugin?
This automatically buys this plus reporting integration.
- Brett
On 05/06/2007, at 1:32 PM, Evan Worley wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> I was thinking there would be some value in doing some work on the
> nunit
> plugin to add some output similar to the junit plugin. Currently
> when nunit
> tests run, all the output is logged to file. It is not too much
> fun when
> your tests run for a few minutes, you see nothing. Here is a junit
> output
> vs nunit output comparison
>
> -- JUNIT --
> Running package1.TestClass1
> Tests run: 3, Failures: 0, Errors: 0, Skipped: 0, Time elapsed:
> 0.016 sec
> Running package2.TestClass2
> Tests run: 4, Failures: 0, Errors: 0, Skipped: 0, Time elapsed:
> 0.031 sec
> .
> .
> .
> Results :
>
> Tests run: 139, Failures: 0, Errors: 0, Skipped: 0
>
> -- NUNIT --
> NMAVEN-040-000: Executed command: Commandline = nunit-console C:\dev
> \project
> \main\component\target\test-assemblies\Namespace.Artifact.dll /out
> {SOME_OUTPUT_FILE} /err {SOME_OUTPUT_FILE}, Result = 0
>
> So I propose not logging the nunit stdout/stderr but rather
> reformatting and
> displaying it like the junit plugin does.
>
> Thoughts?
> Evan
