[Junit-devel] Order in which test methods are run in a testcase

[Trasca V. <vir...@ya...>]

    Hi,

      is there a specified order in which JUnit runs
the test methods from a TestCase. I have a TestCase in
which I have testM1,testM2,testM3 written in the test
case in this order. The order is VERY important for me
as testM1 should be called before testM2, and testM2
before testM3. I know that JUnit theory says that
methods should be not dependend but in my practical
situation I cannot avoid this.

Thanks a lot,
Virgil Trasca

--- jun...@li... wrote:

> Send Junit-devel mailing list submissions to
> 	jun...@li...
> 
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web,
> visit
> 
>
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/junit-devel
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body
> 'help' to
> 	jun...@li...
> 
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> 	jun...@li...
> 
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it
> is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of Junit-devel digest..."
> 
> 
> Today's Topics:
> 
>    1. SourceForge CVS (David Saff)
>    2. Re: AW: AW: [Junit-devel] cvs-timeout (David
> Saff)
>    3. CVS: junit/org/junit/runners
> Enclosed.java,1.3,1.4 (David Saff)
>    4. CVS: junit/org/junit/tests
> EnclosedTest.java,1.3,1.4 SortableTest.java,1.3,1.4
> Enclosed.java,1.1,NONE (David Saff)
>    5. CVS: junit README.html,1.13,1.14 (David Saff)
>    6. CVS: junit build.xml,1.16,1.17 (David Saff)
> 
> --__--__--
> 
> Message: 1
> Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2006 13:21:17 -0500
> From: David Saff <sa...@mi...>
> To: JUnit devel <jun...@li...>
> Subject: [Junit-devel] SourceForge CVS
> 
> All,
> 
> I've heard back from SourceForge.  Some quotes from
> below:
> 
>  >>>>>>
> 
> Per the site status page:
> 
> (  2006-03-13 12:42:16 - Project CVS Service )   As
> of
> 2006-03-12 pserver (anonymous) CVS services, along
> with
> tarballs and ViewCVS are down for projects that
> start with
> the letters e, i, j, o, v, w and x. We hope to
> resolve this
> issue in the next 2 days.
> 
> Please keep an eye there for further updates to this
> issue.
> 
> [snip]
> 
> However, the CVS issues we have been having are
> generally
> hardware related. We are working on swapping out the
> hardware and attempting to isolate the causes, but
> this
> takes time to do, and given the infrastructure and
> volume of
> use, we'd prefer to keep it up, even if only
> limping, than
> take it down for a complete overhaul.
> 
> <<<<<<
> 
> It looks like our options are to sit and wait, or
> change the name of the 
> project to UnitJ.  No guarantees were made about
> subversion speed, so if 
> we decided to change to SVN, it would not
> necessarily be for long-term 
> reliability.  Thanks,
> 
>     David Saff
> 
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: 	[ alexandria-Support Requests-1450494 ]
> CVS services issue
> Date: 	Thu, 16 Mar 2006 06:28:55 -0800
> From: 	SourceForge.net <no...@so...>
> To: 	no...@so...
> 
> 
> 
> Support Requests item #1450494, was opened at
> 2006-03-15 11:14
> Message generated for change (Comment added) made by
> burley
> You can respond by visiting: 
>
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=200001&aid=1450494&group_id=1
> 
> Please note that this message will contain a full
> copy of the comment thread,
> including the initial issue submission, for this
> request,
> not just the latest update.
> Category: Project CVS Services
> Group: None
> >Status: Closed
> Priority: 5
> Submitted By: David Saff (dsaff)
> >Assigned to: David Burley (burley)
> >Summary: CVS services issue
> 
> Initial Comment:
> Dear SourceForge,
> 
> Over the last few months, public anonymous access to
> JUnit CVS has become so slow and unreliable that it
> has
> slowed the pace at which we are able to accept
> patches
> and support early adopters.  Is there anything we or
> you can do to solve this problem?  Are the
> subversion
> servers faster?  Will the subversion servers stay
> fast
> if many people switch over?
> 
> Below is a sampling of independent mailing list
> messages indicating the kinds of problems seen. 
> Thanks,
> 
>    David Saff
> 
> 2006/03/15: "I attempted to check out the current
> CVS
> HEAD, but the system was unresponsive."
> 
> 2006/03/14: "I will send Javadoc updates for the
> classes as soon as cvs.sourceforge.net stops timing
> out
> :-(. It usually works when America is asleep (in the
> morning over here) ...."
> 
> 2006/03/08: "is it just me or do you guys also get
> lots
> of timeouts when trying to synchronize with the
> sourceforge cvs?"
> 
> 2005/10/24: "I have found the SourceForge CVS server
> _extremely_ sluggish and unreliable."
> 
> 2005/09/14: "I get varying errors depending on the
> client,
> but they seem to all be related to
> either the CVS server timing out or the connection
> being refused."
> 
>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> >Comment By: David Burley (burley)
> Date: 2006-03-16 09:28
> 
> Message:
> Logged In: YES 
> user_id=597273
> 
> Greetings,
> 
> Per the site status page:
> 
> (  2006-03-13 12:42:16 - Project CVS Service )   As
> of
> 2006-03-12 pserver (anonymous) CVS services, along
> with
> tarballs and ViewCVS are down for projects that
> start with
> the letters e, i, j, o, v, w and x. We hope to
> resolve this
> issue in the next 2 days.
> 
> Please keep an eye there for further updates to this
> issue.
> 
> Regarding SVN, I am not sure even the SVN developers
> themselves can answer that question. I am not aware
> of a SVN
> installation with a potential to grow as large as
> the one we
> are hosting is. While we have gone to great lengths
> to
> ensure its scalable and do not believe there will be
> issues
> with it (SVN is much easier to scale than CVS), only
> time
> will tell.
> 
> Regarding performance, CVS is actually faster.
> There's 
=== message truncated ===