risdenk commented on PR #953: URL: https://github.com/apache/solr/pull/953#issuecomment-1283004310
So @mkhludnev and @HoustonPutman thanks for the reviews. There are some benefits to using `SolrTestCase` as the base for these tests. The randomization of Locale, thread leak checks, and more. These checks are beneficial that we get some nice things without doing any extra work. SolrTestCase extends from Assert eventually so its easy to get all the static methods from there. The question about SolrTestCase vs TestCase vs SolrTestCase4j - I used SolrTestCase if there was no existing import for one and SolrTestCase4j if there was already an existing import using SolrTestCase4j. My theory being that `SolrTestCase4j` already was needed so extend from it. I didn't see any downside to doing this. Regarding the casting - I'll take a look and see what is possible here. Regarding the assert methods using `SolrTestCase4j` or `SolrTestCase` - I was trying to avoid static imports but can be swayed if this is important to not do this. -- This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. To unsubscribe, e-mail: issues-unsubscr...@solr.apache.org For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: us...@infra.apache.org --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: issues-unsubscr...@solr.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: issues-h...@solr.apache.org
