Skip to content
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

GRADLE-2895 - Add support for user defined JUnit RunListeners #416

Closed
wants to merge 4 commits into from

Conversation

mtau11
Copy link

@mtau11 mtau11 commented Mar 6, 2015

No description provided.

@pskrivanek
Copy link

It is possible to finish this merge? What is need for finishing this issue?

@bigdaz
Copy link
Member

bigdaz commented Sep 4, 2015

We appreciate the work put into this pull request.

The Gradle team doesn't currently have the capacity to deal with all of the bugs, feature requests, great ideas and pull requests that we receive. We already have a pretty big backlog, so it might take some time for us to take a look at this.

Pull requests are interesting because they may seem like they come for "free". Our experience has shown that in order to maintain the level of quality and consistency that Gradle users expect, we need to invest significant engineering effort in all but the most trivial PRs.

We are actively recruiting to increase our engineering team, so hopefully this is a temporary situation. We ask for patience in the meantime.

@pioterj
Copy link
Member

pioterj commented Nov 12, 2015

@mtau11 In order to move forward with pull request we'll need a contributor license agreement from you. This is required for legal reasons before any code contributions can be accepted into the Gradle codebase. Would you mind signing it?

@pioterj pioterj modified the milestones: waiting-for-contributor, waiting-for-cla Nov 12, 2015
@pioterj
Copy link
Member

pioterj commented Dec 1, 2015

@mtau11 Are you still interested in pushing this forward? If yes, could you sign the CLA and resolve the conflicts?

@pskrivanek
Copy link

@mtau11, it is a very useful feature. I still look forward to it appears in the main line.
Could you please deliver the desired document?

If @mtau11 not sends CLA, it's necessary create another branch with changes for integration to main line?

@pioterj
Copy link
Member

pioterj commented Dec 2, 2015

Unfortunately if we don't get the CLA we won't be able to merge this change. If we don't hear back from @mtau11 I'll close this pull request. @pskrivanek if you are interested in starting this over the first step should be creating a design document describing the use case, implementation plan and test coverage. It can be included here: https://github.com/gradle/gradle/blob/master/design-docs/testing-improvements.md

@pioterj
Copy link
Member

pioterj commented Dec 8, 2015

It's been over a month without a response from @mtau11 so I'm closing this pull request. We cannot merge it without a CLA in place. @mtau11 if you ever come back to this and submit the CLA, feel free to re-open it.

@pioterj pioterj closed this Dec 8, 2015
@raulgd
Copy link

raulgd commented Nov 27, 2016

Hi guys,

As @mtau11 is MIA, is there an alternative to load RunListener classes using gradle? I'm a bit new to gradle but handling a test listener on JUnit is something that I think is basic functionality and would be expected to be supported.

@baev
Copy link

baev commented Dec 26, 2016

@raulgd agree
In addition it would be nice to have an ability to load listeners via SPI.

PS I can provide a patch for that. What are you guys think?

@raulgd
Copy link

raulgd commented Feb 5, 2017

@baev created #1330 to restart this task.
I'll take the same code only with enough small changes so it doesn't conflict with this implementation, and I'll be willing to sign the CLA right away, if you want, you can add the SPI thing as well.

@eriwen
Copy link
Contributor

eriwen commented Feb 10, 2017

@raulgd Great! I'll allow you to decide whether you add SPI support or not. Note that smaller changes are easier for us to review and merge, so without much context here I'll suggest you split them into 2 PRs.

@baev
Copy link

baev commented Feb 11, 2017

I'll suggest you split them into 2 PRs.

+1

@ov7a ov7a removed this from the waiting-for-cla milestone Mar 28, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

8 participants