[ 
https://jira.codehaus.org/browse/SUREFIRE-749?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=353278#comment-353278
 ] 

Tibor Digana commented on SUREFIRE-749:
---------------------------------------

@Gili
My wish is to have got a stable maven-surefire 2.x right before 3.x.
>From my PoV the isolation API in 3.x.
I don't have any objections if you would like to work with developers on GitHub 
long enough getting consensus on API design including the tests.
Sorry.

> 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
>            Assignee: Kristian Rosenvold
>
> 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 was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.1.6#6162)

Reply via email to