I didn't talk abou lifecycle and phases and a surefire plugin. My first response to this thread was to simply ask what the "well known problem" was in the hopes I could figure out how to get the cobertura plugin for maven 1 working better. (I did by the way). You must have confused me with the originator of this thread.

Btw - the maven.compile.debug setting is fine.

Ralph

Lukas Theussl wrote:
Your mail is very confusing: you talk about lifecycle and phases and a surefire plugin, all of which do not exist in Maven 1. If you are indeed using the m1 plugin, then your question should go to the plugins-user list at sourceforge (see [1] for links). (Btw, did you check your maven.compile.debug setting?)

Cheers,
-Lukas

[1] http://maven-plugins.sourceforge.net/maven-cobertura-plugin/


Ralph Goers wrote:
No, we have many Maven 1 based projects. We have wanted to move to Maven 2 but cannot until MNG-1577 is applied. I've actually waded through quite a bit of the code in both versions.

Version 1.3 of the Cobertura plugin also uses Cobertura 1.8 so I guess there must be something blatantly wrong with that version. I guess I should try version 1.2 which uses Cobertura 1.7.

Ralph

Bob Allison wrote:

I thought you were using Maven 2. The Maven 2 plugin v2.1 uses Cobertura 1.8 which exhibits this problem. By downgrading the plugin to v2.0, you use v1.7 of Cobertura which does not have this problem.

----- Original Message ----- From: "Ralph Goers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Maven Developers List" <dev@maven.apache.org>
Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2007 9:14 AM
Subject: Re: Lifecycle issues with Cobertura plugin and custom plugin


What is this well known problem. I tried upgrading the plugin for maven 1.0.2 from version 1.1.1 of cobertura to 1.3 and have the same problem - all the reports show 0 coverage.

Ralph

Bob Allison wrote:

Sounds like the well-known Cobertura 2.1 problem. Try explicitly specifying version 2.0 of the plugin and see if that fixes it.

----- Original Message ----- From: "drekka" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <dev@maven.apache.org>
Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2007 1:13 AM
Subject: Lifecycle issues with Cobertura plugin and custom plugin



Hi guys,
I've been trying to nut this out for a couple of days now and need your help. A few weeks ago I wrote a Junit4 plugin which works perfectly in the test phase. It doesn't fork or anything fancy, just gets on with the job.
It's header contains the following annotations:

* @requiresDependencyResolution test
* @goal runJunit4Tests
* @phase test

However when I added the Cobertrua plugin to the mix, the cobertura report keeps reporting 0% coverage. The logs indicate that my plugin is working and using the generated-classes/cobertura/ directory. It also indicates that the classes are being instrumented correctly. yet looking at the .ser file
cobertura uses it would appear that either the
instrumented classes are not logging correctly or not being used as nothing
is appended to the file.

This lead me to conclude that there is something wrong with the way I've setup the plugin within maven. From reading the source of the cobertura plugin it appears that the plugin forks a new process to run the test phase again. At this point I'm not sure what happens as the maven doco is really hard to follow and leave me with more questions than answers. The logs indicate that the test are run twice. Once before instrumenting and once after. I've looked for any direct connection between the surefire and
cobertura plugins but cannot see anything.

Any ideas guys ?

ciao
Derek
--
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Lifecycle-issues-with-Cobertura-plugin-and-custom-plugin-tf3185205s177.html#a8840433
Sent from the Maven Developers mailing list archive at Nabble.com.



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to