On Aug 2, 2012, at 9:34 AM, Hardy Ferentschik wrote: > On 2 Jan 2012, at 4:10 PM, John Verhaeg wrote: > >> >> On Aug 2, 2012, at 1:26 AM, Hardy Ferentschik wrote: >> >>>> When hibernate.test.validatefailureexpected is false (the default), the >>>> result from FailureExpected tests is simply ignored. >>> >>> :-( >> >> Hardy, I'm assuming from your frown, you don't like this for some reason. >> This is the expected behavior, and the main reason for having these >> annotations in the first place. > > I am not following. Why does it make sense to have this flag set to false?
Ah, well that explains it. My assumption about the reason for your frown was wrong. I thought it was the "ignoring" part you were taking issue with, thinking maybe you were wanting some "special" exception thrown instead. I agree the validate flag should be true by default. > So unless I misunderstand the intend of > hibernate.test.validatefailureexpected I think Gail is right and it should be > the default. Also the new metamodel should be the default on the metamodel > branch with the > build completing successfully. This means all failing tests should be > annotated w/ @FailureExpectedWithNewMetamodel. As we implement the missing > functionality and fix bugs we keep removing them until > they are all gone. Now, this is what I thought > @FailureExpectedWithNewMetamodel was all about. Yep, we're all in agreement here. Sorry for the confusion. JPAV _______________________________________________ hibernate-dev mailing list hibernate-dev@lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev
