On Mon, 15 Nov 2021 16:42:04 GMT, Michael Strauß <mstra...@openjdk.org> wrote:
> One comment about adding new JUnit 5 tests and migrating existing tests. I > think there could be value in organizing the tests such that all of the JUnit > 5 tests are grouped, rather than mixing tests in the same directory such that > some use JUnit 5 and others use JUnit 4. What do you (or others) think? We > could either do this with a new JUnit 5 source set in each project, or by > using a package naming convention for JUnit 5 tests like we do for robot > tests. Maybe `test5.some.pkg`. This needs more thought. I don't think this is really needed, since the introduction of JUnit 5 I've written numerous tests in projects with the bulk of their test classes still using JUnit 4. In all cases, the new tests were just mixed with the old tests. The mixing of the tests has so far caused no confusion, and in these projects the teams involved also didn't feel any need to prioritize migrating all tests to JUnit 5. Conversion to JUnit 5 usually happens on a test by test basis when other changes are made to the test -- existing code is rewritten as needed, usually limited to introducing `assertThrows` to replace `@Test(expected = Throwable.class)` and updating all static asserts to use the `jupiter` package hierarchy instead of the `org.junit` one (just import changes). Usually this is done in a separate commit (a "chore" commit) with another commit containing the actual change and new test cases. ------------- PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jfx/pull/633
