Looking at the referenced open issue on Junit5 side, it seems like at least the community is actively working on a @ParameterizedContainer solution. In that case I would +1 for option 2, since we have an easy path for moving to the official class-level annotation when that is ready.
-Jack On Thu, Dec 7, 2023 at 8:27 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré <j...@nanthrax.net> wrote: > Hi Ed, > > I like option 2, it simplifies the parameterized support. > > Just my $0.01 > > Regards > JB > > On Thu, Dec 7, 2023 at 5:16 PM Eduard Tudenhoefner < > etudenhoef...@apache.org> wrote: > >> Hey everyone, >> >> a while ago we (thanks to many contributors that helped here) started >> migrating tests from JUnit4 to JUnit5. While most things are >> straightforward to migrate, parameterized tests are not. >> >> JUnit5 doesn't support parameterization at the class level yet >> <https://github.com/junit-team/junit5/issues/878>, which makes it >> difficult to migrate existing parameterized tests to JUnit5. >> >> There are a few possible options and I'd like to see what the community >> thinks here: >> >> 1) When migrating to JUnit5, parameterized testing is moved to every test >> method, meaning that every test method would have a *@ParameterizedTest* >> and a *@ValueSource/@MethodSource *annotation. >> >> This is the official JUnit5 approach that is recommended. However, it is >> quite repetitive, as every single test method now needs to define its own >> parameters. >> One example of this approach can be seen in #9185 >> <https://github.com/apache/iceberg/pull/9185>, where *TestFlinkScan* is >> migrated to JUnit5. >> >> 2) We could introduce a similar approach that the Flink community did >> with https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-25315 / >> apache/flink#20145 <https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/20145>. >> This would introduce a custom *ParameterizedTestExtension* with two >> additional *@Parameter / **@Parameters* annotations to mimic the same >> behavior that JUnit4 provided. >> One example of this approach can be seen in #9161 >> <https://github.com/apache/iceberg/pull/9161>, where >> *TestDictionaryRowGroupFilter* is migrated to use this way of >> parameterized testing. >> >> I guess another option would be to wait until this is properly supported >> by JUnit5, but it is unclear when that will be. >> >> >> Eduard >> >> >> >>
