HADOOP-19415. [JDK17] Upgrade JUnit from 4 to 5 in hadoop-common Part6. #7419
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
|
💔 -1 overall
This message was automatically generated. |
|
💔 -1 overall
This message was automatically generated. |
|
💔 -1 overall
This message was automatically generated. |
|
💔 -1 overall
This message was automatically generated. |
75 tasks
|
🎊 +1 overall
This message was automatically generated. |
slfan1989
force-pushed
the
HADOOP-19415-PART6
branch
from
a00507f to
5c1eb58
Compare
|
💔 -1 overall
This message was automatically generated. |
|
💔 -1 overall
This message was automatically generated. |
slfan1989
force-pushed
the
HADOOP-19415-PART6
branch
from
54b3c70 to
29806c0
Compare
|
💔 -1 overall
This message was automatically generated. |
slfan1989
requested review from
steveloughran,
szetszwo,
Hexiaoqiao,
jojochuang,
mukund-thakur,
ayushtkn and
anujmodi2021
|
🎊 +1 overall
This message was automatically generated. |
anujmodi2021
approved these changes
May 9, 2025
...ct/hadoop-common/src/test/java/org/apache/hadoop/fs/contract/AbstractContractAppendTest.java
Show resolved
Hide resolved
...op-common/src/test/java/org/apache/hadoop/fs/contract/localfs/TestLocalFSContractLoaded.java
Show resolved
Hide resolved
...mon/src/test/java/org/apache/hadoop/fs/contract/rawlocal/TestRawlocalContractPathHandle.java
Show resolved
Hide resolved
| * See the License for the specific language governing permissions and | ||
| * limitations under the License. | ||
| */ | ||
| package org.apache.hadoop.fs.extend; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Seems like there is a similar class present in org.apache.hadoop.test package. Are we planning to replace that?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thank you for pointing out this issue! I will reference an existing class instead of defining a new one.
| } | ||
|
|
||
| @Test | ||
| public void testDTCredentialProviderFromCurrentUserCreds() throws Throwable { | ||
| describe("Add credentials to the current user, " | ||
| + "then verify that they can be found when S3ADelegationTokens binds"); | ||
| Credentials cred = createDelegationTokens(); | ||
| assertThat("Token size", cred.getAllTokens(), hasSize(1)); | ||
| assertThat(cred.getAllTokens()).hasSize(1). |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This assertThat method is from org.assertj.core.api and other assert related methods like assertTrue are from org.junit.jupiter.api
What is the general guideline here to follow for deciding which one to go with?
Or is the goal here to just get rid of all org.junit.Assert methods and other two can be used as per developers preference?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thank you for raising this question! Personally, I believe we should go with AssertJ, as it aligns with our future direction. My suggestion is to first upgrade the unit tests to JUnit 5, and then gradually replace some of the JUnit assertions with AssertJ. This might take some time, as there are a large number of unit tests across the project that need to be updated.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yes. Got it. Agreed on having a single usage across repo. But yeah it won't be easy to replace all current ones and definitely not as a part of this effort.
But moving ahead for new tests we can try to directly use AssertJ. Will keep this in mind while working on patches and reviewing as well.
|
Hi @slfan1989
I found that both are failing because setup method which was supposed to be called before each test is not getting called. Working fine on trunk. Looks like some Junit 5 issue or a misses annotation. Also recommend checking contract tests for other distros as well. Thanks |
|
@anujmodi2021 Thank you for your feedback! I will fix these two unit tests and check if similar issues exist in other distros. |
|
💔 -1 overall
This message was automatically generated. |
|
🎊 +1 overall
This message was automatically generated. |
|
🎊 +1 overall
This message was automatically generated. |
|
@anujmodi2021 Thank you very much for reviewing the code and providing valuable feedback. I've made the suggested changes and decided to merge this PR into the trunk branch. If any issues arise, feel free to @slfan1989 — I’ll prioritize resolving them. |
YanivKunda
pushed a commit
to YanivKunda/hadoop
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 7, 2025
…6. (apache#7419) * HADOOP-19415. [JDK17] Upgrade JUnit from 4 to 5 in hadoop-common Part6. Co-authored-by: Anuj Modi <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: Hualong Zhang <[email protected]> Reviewed-by: Anuj Modi <[email protected]> Reviewed-by: Hualong Zhang <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: Shilun Fan <[email protected]>
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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.
Description of PR
JIRA: HADOOP-19415. [JDK17] Upgrade JUnit from 4 to 5 in hadoop-common Part6.
How was this patch tested?
For code changes:
LICENSE,LICENSE-binary,NOTICE-binaryfiles?