>From the code I've seen so far, I don't think having a dependency on the
order execution was a voluntary decision, more an accident.
JUnit team seems to think a totally random order is not a perfect solution,
because it makes tests non repeatable. So the new 4.11 is not random, just
different than before, and similar on 1.7 and 1.6.
We can keep the same order for the 1.6 with the new 4.11 option
'MethodSorters.JVM'. I've not tested it. However, it won't work on 1.7.
That's why I've chosen to fix the root cause...
On Mon, Jan 14, 2013 at 5:21 PM, Jonathan Hsieh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Interesting. It's probably good to randomize test ordering. Are the
> classes that failed supposed to be executed in order? (non independent
> test cases?)
> I found this when I was looking if there was an option to keep the older