]
Steve Storck edited comment on ARQ-2016 at 3/5/16 12:50 PM:
------------------------------------------------------------
When I get the container and bundle configurations sufficient to ensure the use of custom
test runners, I will want to be able to test it with the latest version of Karaf. Added
link to ARQ-2018
was (Author: stevestorck):
When I get the container and bundle configurations sufficient to ensure the use of custom
test runners, I will want to be able to test it with the latest version of Karaf.
arquillian-osgi-bundle includes dependencies but does not export
them
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Key: ARQ-2016
URL:
https://issues.jboss.org/browse/ARQ-2016
Project: Arquillian
Issue Type: Feature Request
Components: OSGi Containers
Affects Versions: osgi_2.1.0.Final
Environment: Under Linux, and inside Karaf 4.x
Reporter: Steve Storck
When the arquillian-container-osgi extension is deployed, it also deploys the
arquillian-osgi-bundle. This bundle exposes a few APIs, but it contains (and does not
expose) some of the implementation and SPI packages. This effectively results in only
being able to use the provided JUnitBundleTestRunner extension. I want to use the
arquillian-testrunner-spock extension, but it always fails because I have to deploy the
test SPI bundle with my test jar, and it conflicts with those packages that the
arquillian-osgi-bundle uses internally. This causes an exception to be thrown that
complains that the EventTestRunnerAdaptor implementation is not an instance of the
TestRunnerAdaptor interface. The chain of events that results in the exception is as
follows:
{code:java|title=ArquillianSputnik.java (arquillian-testrunner-spock)|borderStyle=solid}
package org.jboss.arquillian.spock;
public class ArquillianSputnik extends Sputnik {
import org.jboss.arquillian.test.spi.TestRunnerAdaptor;
import org.jboss.arquillian.test.spi.TestRunnerAdaptorBuilder;
// Methods and fields omitted for brevity, but you can see that the
// proper packages are imported
public void run(RunNotifier notifier) {
// Code omitted for brevity
final TestRunnerAdaptor adaptor = TestRunnerAdaptorBuilder.build();
// More code omitted for brevity
}
}
{code}
{code:java|title=EventTestRunnerAdaptorBuilder.java (arquillian-core
test/spi)|borderStyle=solid}
package org.jboss.arquillian.test.spi;
public class TestRunnerAdaptorBuilder {
private static final String DEFAULT_EXTENSION_CLASS =
"org.jboss.arquillian.core.impl.loadable.LoadableExtensionLoader";
private static final String TEST_RUNNER_IMPL_CLASS =
"org.jboss.arquillian.test.impl.EventTestRunnerAdaptor";
public static TestRunnerAdaptor build() {
// omitted lines for brevity
ManagerBuilder builder = ManagerBuilder.from()
.extension(SecurityActions.loadClass(DEFAULT_EXTENSION_CLASS));
return SecurityActions.newInstance(
TEST_RUNNER_IMPL_CLASS,
new Class<?>[] {ManagerBuilder.class},
new Object[] {builder},
TestRunnerAdaptor.class);
}
}
{code}
{code:java|title=SecurityActions.java (arquillian-core test/spi)|borderStyle=solid}
package org.jboss.arquillian.test.spi;
final class SecurityActions {
static <T> T newInstance(final String className,
final Class<?>[] argumentTypes,
final Object[] arguments,
final Class<T> expectedType) {
@SuppressWarnings("unchecked")
Class<T> implClass = (Class<T>) loadClass(className);
if (!expectedType.isAssignableFrom(implClass)) {
throw new RuntimeException("Loaded class " +
className +
" is not of expected type " +
expectedType);
}
return newInstance(implClass, argumentTypes, arguments);
}
}
{code}
I think that the best solution would be to completely decouple the JUnitTestRunner from
the container modules, or at the very least, it would be good to change the
<_exportcontents> to export most (or all) of the embedded dependency packages so
that users can make use of other extensions, or build their own.
Edit: After some more thought, it would be really nice to make test extensions loadable
(with a default if it is unspecified, of course). I don't know enough about the code
base (yet) to say if it would be best to do this via an annotation, or if pluggability
would be better leveraged somewhere else in the framework.