Really fix continuous testing command mode test #50011
Closed
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Status for workflow
|
|
@holly-cummins the test is still disabled, is it intentional? |
Yes, it needs #50031 to pass. My intention here was just to get it into a state where it could pass. |
|
Closing, since the change is included in #50031 |
|
Thanks. It was supposed to go in first, and then I was planning to rebase #50031, but it all works out the same. :) |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Yesterday I moved around a disabled test to try and sort out some test issues (#49988). It turns out my changes were enough to reproduce the defect I was looking at (#49780), but not enough to actually pass when #49780 is fixed.
The actual test problem seems to be a misunderstanding about how
DevModeTestworks; instead of starting with a blank slate in the application jar, it also includes classes from the module? That seems strange, so I'm not sure if it's intentional or not. Normally it wouldn't matter to have duplicated classes from two sources, but for the@QuarkusMainit does. I've got the test working by not including the main class in theDevModeTestinitialisation (and I can see from the output that the main class must be there).Given that, it might be that #49988 wasn't even necessary, and the only changed needed is the one in this PR. However, I kind of like having the top-level integration test for command-mode. WDYT, @aloubyansky?