Martin Kouba
Martin Kouba
> Should we close this now that [#47633](https://github.com/quarkusio/quarkus/pull/47633) is in? Yes, we could reopen if the problem reappears...
> [@holly-cummins](https://github.com/holly-cummins) OP states trying to move to `3.27` from `3.21`. @holly-cummins The big test class loading rewrite landed in 3.22, right? To me this sounds like a class loader...
> > In any case, we should enhance the `Arc.container()` invocation to print out as much diagnostic info as possible (if the container is `null`). > > That seems like...
> When I was debugging it in the spring, what the diagnostics needed to be was "_why_ is this null?", which is really asking "what is the thing that did...
FTR: https://github.com/quarkusio/quarkus/pull/50763
I understand that JUnit6 is more like an evolution with minimal breaking changes and as such a good candidate for drop-in replacement. And the user has an option to go...
> We could go with `quarkus-junit`. My problem with this is: what if they introduce a brand new version that breaks the compatibility entirely and we want to support bother...
@myfear what do you think about the `{#include foo.bar _dynamic /}` syntax/API? Maybe we could find a more accurate word than `_dynamic`?
> What about: > > {#include dynamic=true||false /} with the default / unset = false. Yes, it has to be disabled by default due to backward compatibility. But for the...
> In that case, I'm absolutely OK with _dynamic. I'd vote for `_dynamicTemplate` because it seems to be more accurate. I'll try to prepare a PR and we'll see ;-).