[jira] [Commented] (SUREFIRE-1207) A new JVM is forked even for tests not matching the "groups" tag when "reuseForks" is false

2015-12-14 Thread Michael Comerford (JIRA)
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SUREFIRE-1207?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15055709#comment-15055709 ] Michael Comerford commented on SUREFIRE-1207: - The reason I was trying to do this is

[jira] [Commented] (SUREFIRE-1207) A new JVM is forked even for tests not matching the "groups" tag when "reuseForks" is false

2015-12-14 Thread Tibor Digana (JIRA)
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SUREFIRE-1207?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15055730#comment-15055730 ] Tibor Digana commented on SUREFIRE-1207: I used Mockito. The mock frameworks record methods in

[jira] [Commented] (SUREFIRE-1207) A new JVM is forked even for tests not matching the "groups" tag when "reuseForks" is false

2015-12-14 Thread Tibor Digana (JIRA)
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SUREFIRE-1207?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15055700#comment-15055700 ] Tibor Digana commented on SUREFIRE-1207: [~MComerford] Why you use reuseForks=false? Is it

[jira] [Commented] (SUREFIRE-1207) A new JVM is forked even for tests not matching the "groups" tag when "reuseForks" is false

2015-12-13 Thread Michael Comerford (JIRA)
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SUREFIRE-1207?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15055050#comment-15055050 ] Michael Comerford commented on SUREFIRE-1207: - Sure thing. I'm happy to try and contribute

[jira] [Commented] (SUREFIRE-1207) A new JVM is forked even for tests not matching the "groups" tag when "reuseForks" is false

2015-12-13 Thread Tibor Digana (JIRA)
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SUREFIRE-1207?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15055080#comment-15055080 ] Tibor Digana commented on SUREFIRE-1207: Everything starts with AbstractSurefireMojo.java.

[jira] [Commented] (SUREFIRE-1207) A new JVM is forked even for tests not matching the "groups" tag when "reuseForks" is false

2015-12-12 Thread Andreas Gudian (JIRA)
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SUREFIRE-1207?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15054248#comment-15054248 ] Andreas Gudian commented on SUREFIRE-1207: -- That's a tricky one. The usual way for a provider

[jira] [Commented] (SUREFIRE-1207) A new JVM is forked even for tests not matching the "groups" tag when "reuseForks" is false

2015-12-12 Thread Tibor Digana (JIRA)
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SUREFIRE-1207?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15054271#comment-15054271 ] Tibor Digana commented on SUREFIRE-1207: [~MComerford] Would you open a pull-request for this

[jira] [Commented] (SUREFIRE-1207) A new JVM is forked even for tests not matching the "groups" tag when "reuseForks" is false

2015-12-12 Thread Michael Comerford (JIRA)
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SUREFIRE-1207?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15054382#comment-15054382 ] Michael Comerford commented on SUREFIRE-1207: - Hi [~tibor17] Do you want me to create a

[jira] [Commented] (SUREFIRE-1207) A new JVM is forked even for tests not matching the "groups" tag when "reuseForks" is false

2015-12-12 Thread Tibor Digana (JIRA)
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SUREFIRE-1207?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15054606#comment-15054606 ] Tibor Digana commented on SUREFIRE-1207: [~MComerford] No. I mean fix in surefire. I am working

[jira] [Commented] (SUREFIRE-1207) A new JVM is forked even for tests not matching the "groups" tag when "reuseForks" is false

2015-12-11 Thread Tibor Digana (JIRA)
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SUREFIRE-1207?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15053806#comment-15053806 ] Tibor Digana commented on SUREFIRE-1207: [~MComerford] How it behaved in 2.17 an 2.19? > A new