Il giorno ven 18 mar 2022 alle ore 03:04 Roc Marshal
ha scritto:
>
>
>
>
> Thank you Zixuan, Enrico for your insights.
>
>
> It is necessary to note that assertj is only the API of assertion It is
> equivalent to assertions in JUnit and TestNG, not a testing framework.
> Therefore, it is only e
Thanks for Roc, sounds good.
Roc Marshal 于2022年3月18日周五 10:04写道：
>
>
>
> Thank you Zixuan, Enrico for your insights.
>
>
> It is necessary to note that assertj is only the API of assertion It is
> equivalent to assertions in JUnit and TestNG, not a testing framework.
> Therefore, it is only equi
Thank you Zixuan, Enrico for your insights.
It is necessary to note that assertj is only the API of assertion It is
equivalent to assertions in JUnit and TestNG, not a testing framework.
Therefore, it is only equivalent to the role of JUnit or TestNG assertion API.
And assertj assertions a
Thanks Roc,
Your idea sounds great, the AssertJ is powerful, but I don't recommend
going this path.
1. There are already two test frameworks TestNG and Junit in Pulsar now, we
should only use a test framework - TestNG, there is still some work left to
clean up JUnit: https://github.com/apache/pul
Roc,
Thanks for sharing your proposal.
Changing the test framework will introduce lots of changes and it will
make it harder to share patches between branches.
In Pulsar we are currently maintaining 5 release lines (2.7, 2.8, 2.9,
2.10 and master-2.11).
Maybe using AssertJ for new tests can be a
I support the switch to AssertJ.
Some automated tooling might be useful for doing the bulk of the migration.
AssertJ provides some scripts for the migration:
https://joel-costigliola.github.io/assertj/assertj-core-converting-testng-assertions-to-assertj.html
There's also more sophisticated tools
