Provide mechanism to order the sequence of @Before* and @After* lifecycle methods

[yogurtearl]

It would be great to allow explicit control of ordering things such as @BeforeEach, @AfterEach, @BeforeAll, @AfterAll, and extensions.

My use case from JUnit 4 is that I have a WireMock instance that I want to shutdown via @Rule after some other @Rule's.

[yogurtearl]

Just noticed there is RuleChain. https://github.com/junit-team/junit/wiki/Rules#rulechain

[sbrannen]

This issue is closely related to #13.

[jlink]

I think it could be rather easily solved by having a position property in the @Before/AfterEach/All annotations. This would allow to use the existion Position values (e.g. OUTERMOST, INNERMOST, INSIDE, OUTSIDE). A relative position would require more work.

[bechte]

I believe that this is a different use-case here. We should not mix extensions and the Before/After annotations. Also, I am still very unhappy with these limited positions. So for this use-case it might be better to allow explicit ordering for the test writer. This is related to the Scenario testing we already discussed. Thoughts?

[jlink]

Before/After annotations are already implemented as extension points.

2016-02-04 17:55 GMT+01:00 Stefan Bechtold [email protected]:

I believe that this is a different use-case here. We should not mix
extensions and the Before/After annotations. Also, I am still very unhappy
with these limited positions.

So for this use-case it might be better to allow explicit ordering for the
test writer. This is related to the Scenario testing we already discussed.
Thoughts?

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#87 (comment).

[bechte]

Before/After annotations are already implemented as extension points.

We used the extension point registry internally, but this is different to the test writer. Before/After are not extension points themselves. IMO providing an order (like we are discussing to provide for Scenario Testing) would be both: Easier and more consistent to the test writer.

[jlink]

I need to see a concrete use case to get a feeling for what would be a good approach. Can you think of one?

Am 05.02.2016 um 06:38 schrieb Stefan Bechtold [email protected]:

Before/After annotations are already implemented as extension points.

We used the extension point registry internally, but this is different to the test writer. Before/After are not extension points themselves. IMO providing an order (like we are discussing to provide for Scenario Testing) would be both: Easier and more consistent to the test writer.

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.

[marcphilipp]

If we will add a feature to ensure the order of before/after/test methods it will be in the context of scenario tests (cf. #48).