Galder Zamarreño

@Tibor17 `skipAfterFailureCount` and `rerunFailingTestsCount` don't achieve the same thing: > Since of 2.19.1 you can use parameters skipAfterFailureCount and rerunFailingTestsCount together. This is enabled by providers surefire-junit4 and surefire-junit47. You...

To add more details, one might wonder why we don't set `rerunFailingTestsCount` > 0 on running in CI, and that's because CI doesn't run with TRACE enabled. So, if having...

@Tibor17 But `skipAfterFailureCount` is not what I want. I want to stop after the first failure. `skipAfterFailureCount` makes no sense in my use case. I want to keep the test...

@eolivelli @Tibor17 I don't know how else to explain this. I've even created a [standalone project](https://github.com/galderz/surefire-until-failure-loop-count) where I test this out, so if there's any other way in which this...

@Tibor17 So, how do you suggest it's done? I'm not sure I fully understood your suggestions. From a reporting perspective, overriding previous runs does not seem like an issue to...

@Tibor17 That's fine, keep me posted when this can go in and I can adjust accordingly.

The pattern suggested above was heavily used in Infinispan, where I worked since it's inception for about 10 years. I would often enable trace when debugging something, but I would...

Oh one more thing: the Byteman proposal adds 0 new dependencies and can subtract existing logging dependencies from qbicc. This one Bela Ban would particularly love. A clear downside would...

One other option is [Seafoam](https://github.com/Shopify/seafoam). [Compared to IGV it looks neater](https://github.com/Shopify/seafoam#seafoam-compared-to-igv). You can see more examples [here](https://chrisseaton.com/truffleruby/basic-graal-graphs/).

For context, see this [zulip message](https://qbicc.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/284393-qbicc-development/topic/Newbie's.20lair/near/261260291) and follow up discussion.