Better name for @DockerRequired

[rhusar]

Let's find a better name for @DockerRequired. We in reality require any containerization software that is compatible with Testcontainers (their explicit wording 'Docker-API compatible container runtime'), thus including podman. Random ideas:

• RequiresContainerRuntime
• ContainerRuntimeRequired
• ContainersRequired
• RequiresContainers
• ContainerizationRequired
• RequiresContainerization
• RequiresDockerAPICompatibleRuntime
• CompatibleContainerRuntimeRequired
• ContainerEnvironmentRequired
• ContainerRuntimeCompatible
• OpenContainersRequired

[jamezp]

I've got a new suggestion of @RequiresTestcontainers to make it more generic and really what this is about.

[rhusar]

I've got a new suggestion of @RequiresTestcontainers to make it more generic and really what this is about.

I like the that, but in reality is checks for docker/podman runtime? :-) Wouldn't that make it a bit of a misnomer?

[jamezp]

It does, but that's an implementation detail. We only check if it exists because that's what Testcontainers requires. If for whatever reason they switched to something else, it wouldn't make much sense. The idea is we're saying "Something in this test requires Testcontainers".

[jasondlee]

It does, but that's an implementation detail. We only check if it exists because that's what Testcontainers requires. If for whatever reason they switched to something else, it wouldn't make much sense. The idea is we're saying "Something in this test requires Testcontainers".

That's why I like (d?) @ContainerRequired. It doesn't imply or require a specific containerization engine.

[jamezp]

I'd be a +1 for @ContainerRequired too if we don't like @RequiresTestcontainers. The term "container" is overloaded, but I don't have a better suggestion other than explicitly saying "Testcontainers".

I do also like @OpenContainersRequired given that is the initiative name https://opencontainers.org/