New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Provide set of tests-to-run to TestExecutionPlanner implementations #287

Closed
MatousJobanek opened this Issue Dec 11, 2017 · 0 comments

Comments

Projects
None yet
2 participants
@MatousJobanek
Contributor

MatousJobanek commented Dec 11, 2017

Issue Overview

Provide set of tests-to-run to TestExecutionPlanner implementations.
There are two benefits of it

  • we can optimize the execution of the planners by minimizing of the scope (eg. calculating the graph for the test classes)
  • make feasible implementation of new strategies that need to retrieve some concrete information from the test classes (eg. annotations - see: #283)
Expected Behaviour

Replace the method

Collection<TestSelection> getTests();

by two methods:

Collection<TestSelection> selectTestsFromNames(Iterable<String> testsToRun);

Collection<TestSelection> selectTestsFromClasses(Iterable<Class<?>> testsToRun);

@MatousJobanek MatousJobanek self-assigned this Dec 11, 2017

MatousJobanek added a commit to MatousJobanek/smart-testing that referenced this issue Dec 11, 2017

MatousJobanek added a commit to MatousJobanek/smart-testing that referenced this issue Dec 11, 2017

MatousJobanek added a commit to MatousJobanek/smart-testing that referenced this issue Dec 11, 2017

MatousJobanek added a commit to MatousJobanek/smart-testing that referenced this issue Dec 11, 2017

MatousJobanek added a commit to MatousJobanek/smart-testing that referenced this issue Dec 11, 2017

MatousJobanek added a commit that referenced this issue Dec 12, 2017

feat(#287): the set of tests-to-run is provided to TestExecutionPlann…
…er implementations (#291)

also introduced TestSelector class and two implementations - one for classes and one for names - to separate the logic and avoid usage of confusing generic functions

MatousJobanek added a commit to MatousJobanek/smart-testing that referenced this issue Dec 12, 2017

@bartoszmajsak bartoszmajsak added this to the 0.0.6 milestone Dec 14, 2017

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment