Request for Review of jtreg reporting improvements

[roger riggs]

Hi Jon,

Yes, please push at your convenience.

Thanks, Roger

On 7/3/2013 6:21 PM, Jonathan Gibbons wrote:
> Looks good to me.
>
> Do you want me to push it for you?
>
> -- Jon
>
> On 06/25/2013 09:18 PM, Roger Riggs wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> The webrev has been updated with tests for each of the changes:
>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~rriggs/webrev-jtreg-testng-reporting-7900130
>>
>> Thanks for any comments, Roger
>>
>>
>> On 6/24/13 4:24 PM, Jonathan Gibbons wrote:
>>> On 06/24/2013 12:20 PM, roger riggs wrote:
>>>> Please review changes to address these jtreg reporting output issues:
>>>>
>>>> CODETOOLS-7900130 
>>>> <https://jbs.oracle.com/bugs/browse/CODETOOLS-7900130> Test summary 
>>>> does not show TestNg dataProvider arguments
>>>> CODETOOLS-7900165 
>>>> <https://jbs.oracle.com/bugs/browse/CODETOOLS-7900165> Exception in 
>>>> TestNG DataSource does not result in a reported test failure
>>>> CODETOOLS-7900039 
>>>> <https://jbs.oracle.com/bugs/browse/CODETOOLS-7900039> TestNG 
>>>> Expected exception stack traces in reports are misleading
>>>> CODETOOLS-7900112 
>>>> <https://jbs.oracle.com/bugs/browse/CODETOOLS-7900112> Don't print 
>>>> unnecessary stack traces (dup of 7900039)
>>>>
>>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~rriggs/webrev-jtreg-testng-reporting-7900130/ 
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> What is sufficient testing for jtreg changes?
>>>>
>>>> Roger
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> I try and create a test case in make/tests, perhaps using a toy test 
>>> suite in src/share/test/javatest/regtest. Use jtreg to run the 
>>> test(s) in the test suite and grep the output for what you are (not) 
>>> looking for.
>>>
>>> Failing that, a thorough eyeball test works too.
>>>
>>> -- Jon
>>
>