After updating jbehave to 3.6.x failing test is shown as passing

Not sure what the problem is here. When you upgrade from 3.5.4 to 3.6.7 a bug is fixed.

Why do you say it's a critical issue for you?

Let me rephrase:

on jbehave 3.5.4 test failes --> correct behaviour
on jbehave 3.6.7 test passess --> BUG

Test is written in a way that it should fail.

I've had a look at the attached project but I struggle to understand what the problem is. The story is not self-explanatory.

I also don't really understand the role of the extra annotations you've introduced.

Would you be able to express your use case with a failing self-explanatory scenario using the latest release? Please don't add any extensions to the existing components, unless strictly necessary.

Ok, I'll try

But I'm little bit suprised, project is quite small and is working quite with jbehave 3.5.4. When upgrading to 3.6.7 test is not failing.

Annotations are introduced to pick only specific scenario from given story file, so that class can execute multi scenarios.

Story is simplest I could come up with. I also do not understand why I cannot add extensions if API allows me?

But never mind, I'll try to prepare more biginers example...

Thx

Apart from the use of extra annotations, which I can understand the scope, it's the story that really does not tell me what you're trying to verify.

The following scenario is not what I call self-explanatory

Scenario: abc1
Meta:
@def
Given a
When b
Then c <C> and <D>

Examples:

C	D
C	D
C	D
C	D
C	D
C	D
C	D
C	D

Please take a look at implementation, there is simple assert there, I still do not understand what is complicated here. I can write more meaningful story with real-world example but that's not the case. The case here is fact that new jbehave is "swallowing" AsserionError and showing that test has passed.

Something must have changed between 3.5.4 and 3.6.7 to introduce this behaviour. my extensions are very simple to grasp and understand

I'm sorry but your scenarios are far from straightforward to understand. I'm willing to help, but a more collaborative attitude would be most useful as well.

In particular:

• why are there 3 identical scenarios?
• what's the point of having the examples tables as you've written them?

I would appreciate the simplest possible scenario that reproduces the problem, with some comment on what is expected and why.

Thanks

OK,

I'll provide better example, simpler one. I just need some time.

Will try to keep you posted.

Thx