Considering we're talking about dependencies that final user are expected /
not expected to have in their app, another option would be to add
"examples" in the resteasy-examples repository. Btw, we should also verify
that everything is still working there.
On Wed, Oct 17, 2018 at 4:25 AM Ron Sigal <rsigal(a)redhat.com> wrote:
Well, what I've got now is a new module with three separate
for resteasy-netty, resteasy-netty4, and resteasy-undertow. Maybe there's a
way to do it using profiles, but I don't see it yet.
On 10/16/2018 03:18 PM, Rebecca Searls wrote:
I understand where you are coming from not wanting to create a new module
just for 1 test
but I also prefer not mixing such unrelated code in with existing modules
just to avoid it. I think a
new module would be good here. It makes it very clear these are
different. It does not mix specifying
jboss-servlet-api_3.1_spec with code that does not require it. And over
time there may be the need to add more tests for these. I vote new module.
On Tue, Oct 16, 2018 at 1:56 PM Ron Sigal <rsigal(a)redhat.com> wrote:
> For RESTEASY-2041 "Refactor scopes for Servlet API jar" I want to write
> tests that use netty and undertow, but I'm not sure where to put them.
> They clearly don't go in testsuite/integration-tests, and it's not clear
> that they go in testsuite/unit-tests, which doesn't reference
> resteasy-netty, resteasy-netty4, or resteasy-undertow. Seems a little
> crazy to create a new module just for one test.
> And they can't go in resteasy-netty, resteasy-netty4, or
> resteasy-undertow, because the point of the tests is to check that each
> of them "exports" jboss-servlet-api_3.1_spec to other modules.
> I'm leaning towards testsuite/unit-tests.
> Any thoughts?
> My company's smarter than your company (unless you work for Red Hat)
> resteasy-dev mailing list
My company's smarter than your company (unless you work for Red Hat)
resteasy-dev mailing list