First step would be to open an Jira ticket so you (or any other team
member) can pick it up to work on it.
Am 09.03.2017 13:52, schrieb sorok...@gmail.com:
TinyBundle and BNDlib _were_ required as options in the test setup
(@Configuration method) from what I could tell, or I got errors at runtime when
the OSGi framework went looking for TinyBundle classes needed by the test
resource bundle. Perhaps due to the asynchronous loading in that bundle? I will
double-check, though.
I really like the idea of an includeMavenResources() option as you describe.
That's exactly what I expected and wanted. If I understood more about how the
test probe is built, I would offer to work on that now. But I can do that in
the future, if it seems like that's the best plan.
---
A. Soroka
The University of Virginia Library
On Mar 8, 2017, at 4:13 AM, 'Christoph Läubrich' via
OPS4J<ops4j@googlegroups.com> wrote:
I think an option to include a resource into the test-probe is the most
generic, simple and natural way. For special and/or advanced usage szenarios
the tinybundle option can still be used.
Maybe it would even be possible to have (as an extra) some sort of
includeMavenResources() option that builds on top of this feature and fetches
all resources from scr/test/resources/ and includes them since that is what one
would exspect when working with maven.
BTW: are TinyBundle and BND lib are really required in the test-runtime (=Test
Setup)? Normally they should only be needed on construction time (=test
classpath).
Am 03.03.2017 19:41, schrieb sorok...@gmail.com:
This was a fantastic idea! Thank you, Christoph Läubrich.
I ended up building a dynamic bundle using TinyBundle containing my test
resources just the way I want them arranged, and injecting it like any other
bundle. I use a symbolic name to pick it back up inside the container and use
the resources.
One note: I did need to put TinyBundle and BNDlib into the container to support my test
resource bundle, but that wasn't a big deal. I will pack that part into a new Option or
even pack the whole kit and kaboodle into a some kind of "TestResourceOption".
Would this be a useful PR, or would folks rather have (as Christoph Läubrich mentions)
the ability to directly include resources into the test probe (which does seem a bit
simpler)?
Thanks, OPS4J folks!
--
--
------------------
OPS4J - http://www.ops4j.org - ops4j@googlegroups.com
--- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"OPS4J" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to ops4j+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--
--
------------------
OPS4J - http://www.ops4j.org - ops4j@googlegroups.com
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "OPS4J" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to ops4j+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
