On 20/08/2014 10:11, Marcel Reutegger wrote: > oops, you are right, that would be a bad idea. I thought this is about > a production class and not a test utility. I can see an additional bundle like "testing-commons" that can be imported with scope test by other projects.
The pain point in here is that the testing helpers: functions, classes, etc; uses part of the oak-core api (NodeBuilder, NodeState, etc) and without having the exposed API as a bundle but together with the implementation we go in a loop of having oak-core depending on testing-commons and testing-commons depending on oak-core. D.
