maven-issues mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Tibor Digana (JIRA)" <j...@apache.org>
Subject [jira] [Closed] (SUREFIRE-1171) Misleading documentation on forkCount with JUnit provider
Date Tue, 04 Aug 2015 20:38:05 GMT

     [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SUREFIRE-1171?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]

Tibor Digana closed SUREFIRE-1171.
----------------------------------
    Resolution: Fixed
      Assignee: Tibor Digana

> Misleading documentation on forkCount with JUnit provider
> ---------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: SUREFIRE-1171
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SUREFIRE-1171
>             Project: Maven Surefire
>          Issue Type: Bug
>            Reporter: Bruno Bieth
>            Assignee: Tibor Digana
>
> On this page https://maven.apache.org/surefire/maven-surefire-plugin/examples/fork-options-and-parallel-execution.html
I can read the following:
> {quote}
> As reuseForks=false creates a new JVM process for each test class, using parallel=classes
would have no effect. You can still use parallel=methods, though.
> When using reuseForks=true and a forkCount value larger than one, test classes are handed
over to the forked process one-by-one. Thus, parallel=classes would not change anything.
> {quote}
> However in my experience only the junit47 provider manages forked VM. The junit4 provider
simply ignores the forkCount setting.
> As stated in the documentation on JUnit : http://maven.apache.org/surefire/maven-surefire-plugin/examples/junit.html
in order to activate the junit47 provider one must set the parallel attribute.
> So on one hand the doc says that the parallel attribute is useless with forkCount but
on the other hand if it's not specified, the old junit4 provider is used and forkCount isn't
applied.



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)

Mime
View raw message