On 10/9/14 8:01 PM, Rick Curtis wrote:
> Ie
it would be nice if the test could be written following way
but I'm really not sure if that's doable and what pros/cons
this approach would have - it's just an idea:
I
too am not certain how doable it would be to use annotations
rather than overridden methods. I can take a look though.
that would be great and it should not be difficult if the annotation
would have
RetentionPolicy.RUNTIME. It could perhaps also get us on the path to
make persistence.xml optional at some point - at least for some
simple cases...
Have
you had time to take a look yet? I'd like to get some sort
of conscientious
whether this change is something that I should move forward
with.
yes, finally. I like the way it simplifies writing, building and
running tests - no more "magic" buried in the build scripts, but the
build part requires some work to be following the convention used
through the project (ie using junit.lib property instead of
referring to ECLIPSE_HOME as not all people working on EL do have
Eclipse installed, making sure 'test' from cmd line works etc). OTOH
I would still prefer if we could get rid of required inheritance
from AbstractJPATest and allow people to inherit from whatever
test/class they want if there's a need.
Thanks,
--lukas
_______________________________________________
eclipselink-dev mailing list
eclipselink-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/eclipselink-dev
|