Quarkus continuous test mode hides server output

[pilhuhn]

Describe the bug

I am using the new continuous test mode, which is awesome.
Now when I work on some test-driven coding, I write a test, write the code and then Quarkus runs my test and shows me that my code is not working:

2021-07-21 12:26:16,957 ERROR [io.qua.test] (Test runner thread) ==================== TEST REPORT #11 ====================
2021-07-21 12:26:16,957 ERROR [io.qua.test] (Test runner thread) Test CheckerTest#basicCheck() failed 
: java.lang.AssertionError: 1 expectation failed.
Expected status code <200> but was <500>.

        at io.restassured.internal.ValidatableResponseImpl.statusCode(ValidatableResponseImpl.groovy)
        at com.redhat.clouddot.poc.funq.CheckerTest.basicCheck(CheckerTest.java:26)

2021-07-21 12:26:16,957 ERROR [io.qua.test] (Test runner thread) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1 TEST FAILED <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<


--
1 test failed (1 passing, 0 skipped), 2 tests were run in 467ms. Tests completed at 12:26:16.
Press [r] to re-run, [v] to view full results, [p] to pause, [h] for more options>

But it hides the internal error message that the server would produce, which would help me understand why my code fails.

E.g. when I trigger the same rest-test not from a @QuarkusTest and RestAssured, but via curl , I get my normal stack trace that tells me what does not work in my code.

Expected behavior

Test failure output and server output are shown

Actual behavior

Only test output is shown, but server output is omitted

How to Reproduce?

No response

Output of uname -a or ver

No response

Output of java -version

No response

GraalVM version (if different from Java)

No response

Quarkus version or git rev

2.1.0.CR1

Build tool (ie. output of mvnw --version or gradlew --version)

No response

Additional information

No response

[quarkus-bot]

/cc @stuartwdouglas

[stuartwdouglas]

Press [o] to trigger test output, or use quarkus.test.display-test-output=true to always display it.

We hide it by default to avoid cluttering the console with massive amounts of noise, but maybe we should display the captured output when there is a failure like we do in the Dev UI.

[stuartwdouglas]

I will make this part of the prompt to make it more obvious

[pilhuhn]

Thank you Stuart!