+1 for introducing this rule for junit4 and mockito. Best regards,
Weijie Alexander Fedulov <alexander.fedu...@gmail.com> 于2023年4月26日周三 23:50写道： > +1 for the proposal, > > Best, > Alex > > On Wed, 26 Apr 2023 at 15:50, Chesnay Schepler <ches...@apache.org> wrote: > > > * adds a note to not include "import " in the regex" * > > > > On 26/04/2023 11:22, Maximilian Michels wrote: > > > If we ban Mockito imports, I can still write tests using the full > > > qualifiers, right? > > > > > > For example: > > > > > > org.mockito.Mockito.when(somethingThatShouldHappen).thenReturn(somethingThatNeverActuallyHappens) > > > > > > Just kidding, +1 on the proposal. > > > > > > -Max > > > > > > On Wed, Apr 26, 2023 at 9:02 AM Panagiotis Garefalakis > > > <pga...@apache.org> wrote: > > >> Thanks for bringing this up! +1 for the proposal > > >> > > >> @Jing Ge -- we don't necessarily need to completely migrate to Junit5 > > (even > > >> though it would be ideal). > > >> We could introduce the checkstyle rule and add suppressions for the > > >> existing problematic paths (as we do today for other rules e.g., > > >> AvoidStarImport) > > >> > > >> Cheers, > > >> Panagiotis > > >> > > >> On Tue, Apr 25, 2023 at 11:48 PM Weihua Hu <huweihua....@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > >> > > >>> Thanks for driving this. > > >>> > > >>> +1 for Mockito and Junit4. > > >>> > > >>> A clarity checkstyle will be of great help to new developers. > > >>> > > >>> Best, > > >>> Weihua > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> On Wed, Apr 26, 2023 at 1:47 PM Jing Ge <j...@ververica.com.invalid> > > >>> wrote: > > >>> > > >>>> This is a great idea, thanks for bringing this up. +1 > > >>>> > > >>>> Also +1 for Junit4. If I am not mistaken, it could only be done > after > > the > > >>>> Junit5 migration is done. > > >>>> > > >>>> @Chesnay thanks for the hint. Do we have any doc about it? If not, > it > > >>> might > > >>>> deserve one. WDYT? > > >>>> > > >>>> Best regards, > > >>>> Jing > > >>>> > > >>>> On Wed, Apr 26, 2023 at 5:13 AM Lijie Wang < > wangdachui9...@gmail.com> > > >>>> wrote: > > >>>> > > >>>>> Thanks for driving this. +1 for the proposal. > > >>>>> > > >>>>> Can we also prevent Junit4 usage in new code by this way？Because > > >>>> currently > > >>>>> we are aiming to migrate our codebase to JUnit 5. > > >>>>> > > >>>>> Best, > > >>>>> Lijie > > >>>>> > > >>>>> Piotr Nowojski <pnowoj...@apache.org> 于2023年4月25日周二 23:02写道： > > >>>>> > > >>>>>> Ok, thanks for the clarification. > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> Piotrek > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> wt., 25 kwi 2023 o 16:38 Chesnay Schepler <ches...@apache.org> > > >>>>> napisał(a): > > >>>>>>> The checkstyle rule would just ban certain imports. > > >>>>>>> We'd add exclusions for all existing usages as we did when > > >>>> introducing > > >>>>>>> other rules. > > >>>>>>> So far we usually disabled checkstyle rules for a specific files. > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> On 25/04/2023 16:34, Piotr Nowojski wrote: > > >>>>>>>> +1 to the idea. > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> How would this checkstyle rule work? Are you suggesting to start > > >>>>> with a > > >>>>>>>> number of exclusions? On what level will those exclusions be? > Per > > >>>>> file? > > >>>>>>> Per > > >>>>>>>> line? > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> Best, > > >>>>>>>> Piotrek > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> wt., 25 kwi 2023 o 13:18 David Morávek <d...@apache.org> > > >>>> napisał(a): > > >>>>>>>>> Hi Everyone, > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> A long time ago, the community decided not to use Mockito-based > > >>>>> tests > > >>>>>>>>> because those are hard to maintain. This is already baked in > our > > >>>>> Code > > >>>>>>> Style > > >>>>>>>>> and Quality Guide [1]. > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> Because we still have Mockito imported into the code base, it's > > >>>> very > > >>>>>>> easy > > >>>>>>>>> for newcomers to unconsciously introduce new tests violating > the > > >>>>> code > > >>>>>>> style > > >>>>>>>>> because they're unaware of the decision. > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> I propose to prevent Mockito usage with a Checkstyle rule for a > > >>>> new > > >>>>>>> code, > > >>>>>>>>> which would eventually allow us to eliminate it. This could > also > > >>>>>> prevent > > >>>>>>>>> some wasted work and unnecessary feedback cycles during > reviews. > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> WDYT? > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> [1] > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>> > > > https://flink.apache.org/how-to-contribute/code-style-and-quality-common/#avoid-mockito---use-reusable-test-implementations > > >>>>>>>>> Best, > > >>>>>>>>> D. > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> > > > > >
