[
https://jira.codehaus.org/browse/SUREFIRE-749?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=271110#comment-271110
]
Gili commented on SUREFIRE-749:
-------------------------------
Kristian,
If I understand correctly, JUnit4Provider.invoke(Object) invokes:
{quote}
for ( Class clazz : testsToRun.getLocatedClasses() )
executeTestSet( clazz, reporter, runNotifer );
{quote}
JUnit4TestSet.execute(Class, RunNotifier, String) then invokes:
{quote}junitTestRunner.run( fNotifier );{quote}
Am I correct in assuming that this line executes a single @Test?
> Parallel methods should run in separate classloaders
> ----------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: SUREFIRE-749
> URL: https://jira.codehaus.org/browse/SUREFIRE-749
> Project: Maven Surefire
> Issue Type: New Feature
> Components: Junit 4.7+ (parallel) support
> Affects Versions: 2.8.1
> Reporter: Gili
>
> When running in parallel-method or parallel-both mode, each @Test should run
> in its own ClassLoader. I'm running into a lot of problems involving the use
> of static variables in 3rd-party libraries. Here are two examples:
> 1. slf4j: http://bugzilla.slf4j.org/show_bug.cgi?id=176
> 2. guice: http://code.google.com/p/google-guice/issues/detail?id=635
> I believe running in isolated ClassLoaders would fix both problems and it
> makes a lot of sense from a test isolation point of view so we should do it
> anyway.
> I believe Surefire's forkMode is defined in terms of isolated JVMs instead of
> ClassLoaders. Furthermore, it only seems to support per-Class isolation
> instead of per-@Test isolation.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
