Stefano Cordio

In the form of assertion / assumption, it could be a candidate for AssertJ's [AbstractUrlAssert](https://www.javadoc.io/doc/org.assertj/assertj-core/latest/org/assertj/core/api/AbstractUrlAssert.html). Might be a bit far from the usual assertion concept, though. I'll discuss it internally...

@Michael1993 I'm happy to take this up and see what we can get

I have preliminary feedback about this topic. The simple copy-paste from JUnit does not work out of the box because the `CartesianProductTestExtension` flattens the parameters returned by the provider. See:...

@Michael1993 I plan to work on this Soon™ 🙂 is there any refactoring I should wait for (e.g., https://github.com/junit-pioneer/junit-pioneer/issues/447#issuecomment-814036571) to minimize conflicts?

If I understand your proposal correctly, each line would provide all the possible values for the correspojnding parameter. So, with: ```java @CartesianProductTest @CartesianCsvSource({ "1, 2", "A, C, E", "B, D,...

Reopening as we'll add a BOM as a consequence of #2424.

Currently, something like this would be possible: ```java assertThat(field.getAnnotations()) .allSatisfy(annotation -> assertThat(annotation).isInstanceOfAny(XmlAttribute.class, XmlElement.class)); ``` Should we maybe focus on your concrete use case instead of targeting a general solution for...

Sure and thanks, @icod!

Hi Simon, thanks for the PR! This probably overlaps with #2759, which is already stable from the Maven perspective but: * Has an issue with IntelliJ, see [IDEA-301032](https://youtrack.jetbrains.com/issue/IDEA-301032) * Lacks...

> make the original unit tests work within this modular module. This is a cool point I didn't consider yet: it would be much better to re-run our entire test...