On Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 15:28, Jason Porter <lightguard.jp(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 13:09, Dan Allen <dan.j.allen(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 17, 2011 at 20:56, Jason Porter <lightguard.jp(a)gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> On Aug 17, 2011, at 18:46, Shane Bryzak <sbryzak(a)redhat.com> wrote:
>>
>> > I've done some work to seam-parent already, removing weld-parent from
>> > the hierarchy, updating all the plugin versions and some general
>> > cleanup. I have a bunch of questions though, if anyone can answer any
>> > of these it will save me a lot of time:
>> >
>> > 1) Do we require both junit and testng?
>>
>> I think most are using JUnit. I found ftests that use testng though.
>>
>
> That will go away when we switch to Arquillian Drone. The precursor to
> Drone was bound to (or worked more comfortably) with testng. That's not the
> case any longer.
>
> JUnit is a much better choice with Arquillian, atm. The intention is to
> have an equal experience with both, but we are still facing some SPI
> challenges w/ TestNG.
>
> Sadly, that knocks out groups. However, we have plans to put a filtering
> feature at a higher level, in Arquillian itself.
>
I don't really like how JUnit is doing groups, but they do have a
comparable feature now called Categories. I think I can actually say JUnit
is moving forward now (maybe not in a direction we agree with) and TestNG is
staying rather stagnant.
The groups in JUnit are incompatible with the Arquillian integration (they
both use the same mechanism, which is a strange way to implement groups).
Both projects are moving forward, but in very different ways.
-Dan
--
Dan Allen
Principal Software Engineer, Red Hat | Author of Seam in Action
Registered Linux User #231597
http://www.google.com/profiles/dan.j.allen#about
http://mojavelinux.com
http://mojavelinux.com/seaminaction