Can't set `classname` for `testcase` element in JUnit XML when using `node:test`

[CuriousStork]

Version

v24.4.1

Platform

Microsoft Windows NT 10.0.19045.0 x64

Subsystem

test

What steps will reproduce the bug?

1. Create any test file, like

   import { suite, test } from "node:test";
   
   await suite('suiteName', () => {
     test('testName', () => {});
   });

2. Run the test via console

   node --test --test-reporter=junit ".\src\junit.test.mts"

3. Check the report from stdout.

How often does it reproduce? Is there a required condition?

Always. Regardless the suite or test function arguments.

What is the expected behavior? Why is that the expected behavior?

There should be a way to set classname value for the JUnit report.

As of JUnit XML specification, classname is

Full class name for the class the test method is in.

For example, GitLab uses classname when rendering the test reports.

https://docs.gitlab.com/ci/testing/unit_test_reports/

The testcase classname attribute is used as the suite name, not the testsuite name attribute.

What do you see instead?

 <testcase name="testName" time="0.000363" classname="test"/>

classname is always "test".

Additional information

I guess currently there's no way to set classname in a test event, so reports always get "test" instead:

node/lib/internal/test_runner/reporter/junit.js

Line 118 in 931ec10

currentTest.attrs.classname = event.data.classname ?? 'test';

[lluisemper]

I can replicate this issue. I would be happy to implement a fix for this.

• An option could be to set the testname based on the name of the file: <testcase name="testName" classname="C:\path\to\src\junit.test"/> I think that the location is passed to the event.

• Another one it could be to pass an object to the test function: test('testName', { classname: 'testName' }, () => {});, however this is only for the junit reporter and would create a breaking change.

• The last option I can think of is to trasverse the suite a put the names like this:

suite('Math', () => {
  suite('Addition', () => {
    test('adds positive numbers', () => {});
  });
});

<testcase name="adds positive numbers" classname="Math.Addition"/>

I do prefer the third option, what do you think guys?

[CuriousStork]

Hello, my two cents here.

I've checked how Playwright and Jest handling classname-s. They use templates:

• [Feature] Junit ClassName Template support microsoft/playwright#20380
• https://github.com/jest-community/jest-junit?tab=readme-ov-file#configuration

Maybe templating is another option, if there's a good way to convey the template to the reporter both programmatically and via CLI.

[Han5991]

I agree that the template approach might be over-engineering at this stage. Option 3 (suite hierarchy) seems like the most pragmatic solution - it's intuitive, doesn't break existing APIs, and solves the core problem.
We can always add template support later if there's proven demand for more complex formatting.
@lluisemper Would it be okay if I implement the suite hierarchy approach? I think it's a solid first step that we can build upon.

[lluisemper]

@Han5991 Sure, go ahead!💪 Let us know your findings in case we can be of any help

[mag123c]

Is anyone currently working on an implementation? If not, may I take this on and open a PR implementing the suite-hierarchy approach (setting the testcase classname from suite nesting)?

[Han5991]

@mag123c Sure, go ahead