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

Reply via email to