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.

Reply via email to