Running tests produces a warning about duplicate junit-platform.properties files

[wilkinsona]

Jul 11, 2024 10:26:21 AM org.junit.platform.launcher.core.LauncherConfigurationParameters loadClasspathResource
WARNING: Discovered 2 'junit-platform.properties' configuration files in the classpath; only the first will be used.
Jul 11, 2024 10:26:21 AM org.junit.platform.launcher.core.LauncherConfigurationParameters loadClasspathResource
WARNING: Discovered 2 'junit-platform.properties' configuration files in the classpath; only the first will be used.

The files are coming from Apache Kafka:

• jar:file:/Users/awilkinson/.gradle/caches/modules-2/files-2.1/org.apache.kafka/kafka-server-common/3.7.1/63fd797c55fcefb405bf975b5d764f0c84d19751/kafka-server-common-3.7.1-test.jar!/junit-platform.properties
• jar:file:/Users/awilkinson/.gradle/caches/modules-2/files-2.1/org.apache.kafka/kafka-clients/3.7.1/f083d8a36936f1f380b87c2ad8f7e2f5b04ea8f0/kafka-clients-3.7.1-test.jar!/junit-platform.properties

The dependencies on test artifacts are coming from spring-kafka-test. The kafka-clients-3.7.1-test dependency is needed at runtime but kafka-server-common-3.7.1-test doesn't appear to be needed for Boot's own Kafka-related tests at least. Perhaps spring-kafka-test can drop its kafka-server-common-3.7.1-test dependency?

Having only the kafka-clients-3.7.1-test test dependency will address the warning but it will leave our unit tests running using the custom properties that kafka-clients-3.7.1-test defines which is not ideal. I've opened KAFKA-17121 to see if this can be addressed at source. In the meantime, we may be able to exclude the kafka-server-common-3.7.1-test in Boot's build and then hopefully remove the exclusion once a change has been made in Kafka (ideally) or in Spring Kafka.

[72wildcard]

Hey,

Quick question, currently migrating from spring-boot 3.2.6 to 3.4.1. Still experiencing the same behaviour, although this ticket was closed mentioning 3.3.2.

Any thoughts?

[philwebb]

@72wildcard It's hard to tell from the logs alone, perhaps you're not using our parent POM? If you'd like us to spend some time investigating, please open a new issue and provide a complete minimal sample (something that we can unzip or git clone, build, and deploy) that reproduces the problem.