is it worth spinning up a google group for guiceberry?

[GoogleCodeExporter]

or would the guice group be the place you'd rather chat about guiceberry?

GuiceBerry looks cool BTW - my first question was, why not use a Class rather 
than a String for the @GuiceBerryEnv annotation. I guess there must have been a 
good reason right?

Original issue reported on code.google.com by james.st...@gmail.com on 16 Oct 2008 at 9:44

[GoogleCodeExporter]

Sorry for the delay. I couldn't yet find a way to be notified of posts here. I 
think
a GuiceBerry group is a good idea. I'll work on this today.

As for the @GBE taking a .class, this is the most frequently asked question (I 
ought
to add an FAQ here), and the answer is sometimes not satisfactory to some that 
happen
to not care about a certain issue: compile-time dependencies.

You see, using a class would cause the test to have a compile-time dependency on
something that is, fundamentally, a runtime dependency: i.e. the env that is 
needed
to run the test. More precisely (if you take GuiceBerryEnvRemappers into
consideration), it would cause the test to have a compile-time dependency on the
default env that is needed to run it.

Stated another way, it's a very convenient place to have the only "reflection" 
link
between test and test env.

I'll add a FAQ for that.

Original comment by zorze...@gmail.com on 12 Nov 2008 at 4:02

[GoogleCodeExporter]

* FAQ created (and linked off the main page) with an even-more-fleshed-out 
answer

* Group created

* I found the place to request notifications on issues being added

Original comment by zorze...@gmail.com on 12 Nov 2008 at 5:33

• Changed state: Fixed