Hi devs,
I don’t recall if we had already agreed to this proposal or not so now that I’ve
progressed with its implementation I’m sending this mail to ensure we all agree.
Rationale:
* The build logs should not be polluted with “normal” stack traces, or any message.
Anything that the test produces should be contained and asserted in the test itself.
* If some logs go through it means they’ve not been captured and not been asserted in the
test.
* It makes the test writer more aware of what the code being tested outputs and thus what
the test writer needs to do about these.
Implementation details:
* Fail the build if some unit test output content to stdout or stderr.
* By default any code that outputs log will send content to stdout (since by default
slf4j/logback will use a Console Appender that logs to stdout).
* Thus when code output logs, the test need to capture those logs. I’m introduced a new
rule (@AllLogRule - see
https://gist.github.com/vmassol/d6357901fca25db74783) which
captures all logs.
* The @AllLogRule rule will fail the test if the captured logs are not asserted (it can be
asserted for its content or the test can explicitly say it doesn’t care about it).
* There will be a custom RunListener (CaptureConsoleRunListener - see
https://gist.github.com/vmassol/f3b7496b5bd3a9693fc2) plugged into the Maven Surefire
plugin that fails the build if there’s content sent to stdut/stderr
* Our Maven build will perform the check by default and we’ll start by disabling it in the
modules that currently fail.
* The idea is that slowly over time we remove the disabling in those modules as we fix the
tests and that for new modules we apply the new rule (which will be enabled by default)
Example of capturing/asserting logs:
@Rule
public AllLogRule logRule = new AllLogRule();
…
assertEquals("Error getting resource [bad resource] because of invalid path
format. Reason: [invalid url]",
this.logRule.getMessage(0));
Example of ignoring a log:
…
assertNotNull(this.logRule.getMessage(0));
WDTY?
Thanks
-Vincent