[ARQ-985] Registering spring context on the client side.

[jmnarloch]

For review and pull upstream.

[jmnarloch]

I have made a quick fix to support embedded containers in general, but I'm not entirely satisfied with the implementation. Especially if you take a look at SpringRemoteInjectionEnricher or SpringClientInjectionEnricher, there must be a better way to resolve those contexts.

[aslakknutsen]

Could you rebase this on top of master. I got a few small merge issues, nothing major, but tests are not passing.

One problem seems to be: arquillian-service-integration-spring/src/main/java/org/jboss/arquillian/spring/integration/container/SpringContainerApplicationContextProducer

It should use InjectionProducer of type TestScopeApplicationContext not RemoteTest... for the Spring Transaction extension to find it.

When that is corrected, i'm getting a few other exceptions. EntityManager is null, Controller not injected etc..

Could you have a look ?

[jmnarloch]

Could you have a look ?

Yes. Right away.

[jmnarloch]

Try with this one.

[aslakknutsen]

awesome! Works like a charm...

squashed and pushed https://github.com/arquillian/arquillian-extension-spring/commit/7056ade4ffcf387c836edef581ecf86aaada65f4

[jmnarloch]

Thanks again :)

[jmnarloch]

Just some thought to share:

Considering the current implementation:

public class SpringClientInjectionEnricher extends AbstractSpringInjectionEnricher<ClientTestScopeApplicationContext> {

     @Inject
     private Instance<ClientTestScopeApplicationContext> testApplicationContext;
}

Do you think that it would be improvment to Arquillian if it could support injection in fallowing case:

public class AbstractSpringInjectionEnricher<T> {

     @Inject
     private Instance<T> testApplicationContext;
}

public class SpringClientInjectionEnricher extends AbstractSpringInjectionEnricher<ClientTestScopeApplicationContext> {

   // empty 
}

I've came across the typetools (https://github.com/jhalterman/typetools) that proves that such constructs could be supported as well, although it requires a bit of work to retrieve the actual type.

cc @aslakknutsen

[aslakknutsen]

Just some thought to share:

Considering the current implementation:

public class SpringClientInjectionEnricher extends AbstractSpringInjectionEnricher {

 @Inject
 private Instance<ClientTestScopeApplicationContext> testApplicationContext;

}

Do you think that it would be improvment to Arquillian if it could support injection in fallowing case:

public class AbstractSpringInjectionEnricher {

 @Inject
 private Instance<T> testApplicationContext;

}

public class SpringClientInjectionEnricher extends AbstractSpringInjectionEnricher {

// empty }

I've came across the typetools (https://github.com/jhalterman/typetools) that proves that such constructs could be supported as well, although it requires a bit of work to retrieve the actual type.

I have a branch that support generics in injections using google guava's TypeToken. Currently holing it back as extracting TypeToken from guava was a lot harder then expected, it's depends more or less on the whole lib, which is 1.7mb and to big for Core.

I'm not sure I tested this specific scenario in it, but Instance<List> for instance works.