[Hawkular-dev] What should be the replacement for printlns in tests?

[Jay Shaughnessy]

Just out of curiosity, i'm not against a change, but what is the reason 
to not have printlns, the jira just says "should not have" and doesn't 
state the misfortune that befalls their use.

On 1/27/2016 4:44 AM, Peter Palaga wrote:
> Hi *,
>
> Short version: How to configure the log levels for individual
> jboss.logging loggers in tests run by maven outside the container?
>
> Long version:
> I was recently assigned https://issues.jboss.org/browse/HAWKULAR-264 Add
> println checks to the checkstyle. It says that "Tests shouldn't be
> allowed to have printlns, we should enforce this via the checkstyle plugin."
>
> I fully agree for tests being run on the server side - those can use
> JBoss Logging in the very same manner as the server code.
>
> However, what is the best replacement for println()s in tests that are
> run outside the server?
>
> I tried using JBoss Logging there too but I failed completely to find a
> way to configure the log levels for individual loggers. Does anybody
> know how to do that?
>
> To get my work done without using printlns, I started to use
> java.util.logging configured via logging.properties :
> https://github.com/hawkular/hawkular-agent/blob/master/hawkular-wildfly-agent-itest-parent/hawkular-wildfly-agent-itest/src/test/resources/logging.properties
>
> So what should be the replacement for printlns in tests?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Peter
> _______________________________________________
> hawkular-dev mailing list
> hawkular-dev at lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hawkular-dev
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/hawkular-dev/attachments/20160127/aadf0961/attachment.html