The current implementation for handling test-template-invocation tests, such as when the @RetryingTest annotation is used, automatically prepends the displayName of the parent test to the generated test case names. This results in duplicated and cluttered test case names within the Allure report, negatively impacting readability and usability.
This issue echoes concerns previously highlighted in Issue #831, where similar naming challenges were discussed.
Example code
@RetryingTest(maxAttempts = 3, name = "{displayName} [Attempt {index}]")
public void shouldWorkAsExpected() {
Assertions.assertTrue(true);
}
Current Behavior
The Allure report currently generates names like:
Should work as expected Should work as expected [Attempt 1]
This duplication detracts from the reportās clarity and makes navigation cumbersome.
Screenshots
Logs:
Allure Report:
Expected Behavior
The test case names in the Allure report should be concise, with unnecessary repetition removed, such as:
Should work as expected [Attempt 1]
Screenshots
Logs:
Allure Report:
Proposed solution
To enhance the usability of the Allure reports, I propose introducing a configuration flag, such as allure.disableDisplayNamePrepend, that would allow users to opt-out of the automatic prepending of the displayName for test-template-invocation scenarios.
Implementation details
The modification can be made within the AllureJunitPlatform.java class of the allure-junit-platform module. The relevant logic could be updated around this line to conditionally prepend the displayName based on the new configuration flag.
If the allure.disableDisplayNamePrepend flag is enabled, the framework should bypass the prepending step, ensuring that only the concise, meaningful name specified in the @RetryingTest annotation is used.
Considerations
While removing {displayName} entirely from the @RetryingTest annotation's name argument could fix the reports, it also impacts the clarity of test results in other contexts (such as IDEs or logs), the proposed flag would provide a balanced approach. It allows users the flexibility to opt-out of the current behavior without disrupting existing workflows.
Another workaround is to introduce Allure.getLifecycle().updateTestCase(testResult -> testResult.setName(testResult.getTestCaseName())); in each test method. However, this approach is impractical as it risks being overlooked/forgotten, introduces unnecessary clutter, and compromises the clarity of the test code.
Final words
I am confident that this enhancement will significantly improve the Allure report's usability and interoperability.
Thank you for your attention to this matter and for considering the proposed improvement.
What Allure Integration are you using?
allure-junit5
What version of Allure Integration you are using?
2.29.0
What version of Allure Report you are using?
2.30.0
Code of Conduct
[X] I agree to follow this project's Code of Conduct
What happened?
The current implementation for handling
test-template-invocationtests, such as when the@RetryingTestannotation is used, automatically prepends thedisplayNameof the parent test to the generated test case names. This results in duplicated and cluttered test case names within the Allure report, negatively impacting readability and usability.This issue echoes concerns previously highlighted in Issue #831, where similar naming challenges were discussed.
Example code
Current Behavior
The Allure report currently generates names like:
Should work as expected Should work as expected [Attempt 1]This duplication detracts from the reportās clarity and makes navigation cumbersome.
Screenshots
Logs:
Allure Report:
Expected Behavior
The test case names in the Allure report should be concise, with unnecessary repetition removed, such as:
Should work as expected [Attempt 1]Screenshots
Logs:
Allure Report:
Proposed solution
To enhance the usability of the Allure reports, I propose introducing a configuration flag, such as
allure.disableDisplayNamePrepend, that would allow users to opt-out of the automatic prepending of thedisplayNamefortest-template-invocationscenarios.Implementation details
The modification can be made within the
AllureJunitPlatform.javaclass of theallure-junit-platformmodule. The relevant logic could be updated around this line to conditionally prepend thedisplayNamebased on the new configuration flag.If the
allure.disableDisplayNamePrependflag is enabled, the framework should bypass the prepending step, ensuring that only the concise, meaningful name specified in the@RetryingTestannotation is used.Considerations
{displayName}entirely from the@RetryingTestannotation'snameargument could fix the reports, it also impacts the clarity of test results in other contexts (such as IDEs or logs), the proposed flag would provide a balanced approach. It allows users the flexibility to opt-out of the current behavior without disrupting existing workflows.Allure.getLifecycle().updateTestCase(testResult -> testResult.setName(testResult.getTestCaseName()));in each test method. However, this approach is impractical as it risks being overlooked/forgotten, introduces unnecessary clutter, and compromises the clarity of the test code.Final words
I am confident that this enhancement will significantly improve the Allure report's usability and interoperability.
Thank you for your attention to this matter and for considering the proposed improvement.
What Allure Integration are you using?
allure-junit5
What version of Allure Integration you are using?
2.29.0
What version of Allure Report you are using?
2.30.0
Code of Conduct