Yep - turning off my local JIRA got me passed that problem and now I get the same set of errors as Seb.
Hen On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 2:11 PM, Petar Tahchiev <[email protected]> wrote: > Actually Hentry's problem > was that he had something alreadty running on port 8080. > > But you are right. We check if the property is set :-( > > Ok, I will try to investigate further. > > On Wed, Jan 21, 2009 at 12:06 AM, sebb <[email protected]> wrote: > >> On 20/01/2009, Petar Tahchiev <[email protected]> wrote: >> > Hi guys, >> > >> > I think I found the problem, but since I cannot reproduce >> > this behaviour I am clueless if this will work. >> > I think the problem is here: >> > >> > http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/SUREFIRE-98 >> >> The issue relates to not finding a property - however the code already >> does a separate check to see if the property has been retrieved OK, so >> I don't think it applies here. >> >> > I changed the version of the Surefire plugin we use to the latest >> > one. >> > >> > I have commited it. Anything else before I make the RC-3 and cast the >> vote? >> > >> >> Probably best if Henri could provide more info on the failure he saw, >> which I think was different from mine. >> >> I'm also intending to try a test on Unix. >> >> I suggest waiting a bit. >> >> > >> > Thanks again, Petar. >> > >> > On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 10:51 PM, Petar Tahchiev < >> > >> > [email protected]> wrote: >> > >> > > Hi Sebb, >> > > >> > > I removed the CDDL license and described the servlet-api as >> > > an Apache 2.0 licensed. I also added the Apache license headers. >> > > I also changed the version of AspectJ we are using. >> > > >> > > About the test failures that you mention I think they are different >> > > from what Henry is getting. Anyways I am unable to reproduce them :-( >> > > >> > > What should I do? Do I need to make a RC-3 and call the vote on it? >> > > >> > > Thanks for the tips guys. >> > > >> > > >> > > On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 9:42 PM, sebb <[email protected]> wrote: >> > > >> > >> On 20/01/2009, sebb <[email protected]> wrote: >> > >> > On 20/01/2009, Petar Tahchiev <[email protected]> wrote: >> > >> > > Hi all, >> > >> > > >> > >> > > maybe I am too impatient, but has anybody tried the artifacts? >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > 1 minor problem - the .asc files should be detached ascii >> signatures, >> > >> > not signed archives. >> > >> > No need to recreate the RC, just recreate the .asc files. >> > >> > >> > >> > We don't normally provide binary .sig files - they can be deleted. >> > >> > >> > >> > I'm still looking at other aspects of the RC. >> > >> > >> > >> >> > >> The servlet-api-2.4.jar file is an Apache version, as Henri already >> > >> mentioned. >> > >> The cddl licence should be deleted, and the README updated. >> > >> >> > >> Like Henri, I also get test failures: >> > >> >> > >> [surefire] Tests run: 5, Failures: 3, Errors: 0, Time elapsed: 0.25 >> > >> sec <<<<<<<< FAILURE !! >> > >> [surefire] Running >> > >> org.apache.cactus.integration.ant.deployment.webapp.TestWarArchive >> > >> [surefire] Tests run: 3, Failures: 3, Errors: 0, Time elapsed: 0.031 >> > >> sec <<<<<<<< FAILURE !! >> > >> [surefire] Running >> > >> org.apache.cactus.integration.ant.deployment.webapp.TestWebXml >> > >> [surefire] Tests run: 54, Failures: 0, Errors: 0, Time elapsed: 2.359 >> sec >> > >> [surefire] Running >> > >> org.apache.cactus.integration.ant.deployment.webapp.TestWebXmlVersion >> > >> [surefire] Tests run: 8, Failures: 0, Errors: 0, Time elapsed: 0.093 >> sec >> > >> [surefire] Running >> org.apache.cactus.integration.ant.TestCactifyEarTask >> > >> [surefire] Tests run: 3, Failures: 3, Errors: 0, Time elapsed: 0.031 >> > >> sec <<<<<<<< FAILURE !! >> > >> [surefire] Running >> org.apache.cactus.integration.ant.TestCactifyWarTask >> > >> [surefire] Tests run: 21, Failures: 21, Errors: 0, Time elapsed: >> 0.281 >> > >> sec <<<<<<<< FAILURE !! >> > >> [surefire] Running org.apache.cactus.integration.ant.TestCactusTask >> > >> [surefire] Tests run: 7, Failures: 7, Errors: 0, Time elapsed: 0.078 >> > >> sec <<<<<<<< FAILURE !! >> > >> [surefire] Running >> org.apache.cactus.integration.ant.TestCactusTestTask >> > >> [surefire] Tests run: 7, Failures: 7, Errors: 0, Time elapsed: 0.094 >> > >> sec <<<<<<<< FAILURE !! >> > >> [surefire] Running >> > >> org.apache.cactus.integration.ant.TestRunServerTestsTask >> > >> [surefire] Tests run: 6, Failures: 6, Errors: 0, Time elapsed: 0.078 >> > >> sec <<<<<<<< FAILURE !! >> > >> >> > >> I ran "mvn test", which failed when it could not find the cactus >> jars. >> > >> It would be better if this worked without needing to do "mvn install" >> > >> first. >> > >> >> > >> I then ran "mvn install" and got the errors shown above. >> > >> >> > >> It looks like these are all caused by >> > >> >> > >> junit.framework.AssertionFailedError: The system property >> > >> 'testinput.dir' must point to an existing directory >> > >> at junit.framework.Assert.fail(Assert.java:47) >> > >> at junit.framework.Assert.assertTrue(Assert.java:20) >> > >> at >> > >> >> org.apache.cactus.integration.ant.AntTestCase.getBuildFile(AntTestCase.java:370) >> > >> >> > >> This is a bit odd, as the directory appears to be there. >> > >> >> > >> The assert() message ought to quote the directory name it is looking >> for. >> > >> [I'll update SVN trunk.] >> > >> >> > >> Even odder, the problem does not occur when I reran the test. >> > >> I've tried several times to recreate the error, but it only happened >> once. >> > >> >> > >> == >> > >> >> > >> There are various jetty files under >> > >> >> > >> samples/jetty/src >> > >> >> > >> which don't have AL headers. Are these Jetty sources? >> > >> If so, then the source archive really needs to include the relevant >> > >> license. >> > >> If the samples were generated under the ASF, then they need the AL >> > >> headers. >> > >> >> > >> There seem to be some oddities in the main pom.xml: >> > >> >> > >> <dependencies> >> > >> <dependency> >> > >> <groupId>aspectj</groupId> >> > >> <artifactId>aspectjrt</artifactId> >> > >> <version>1.5.3</version> >> > >> </dependency> >> > >> >> > >> specifies version 1.5.3, whereas >> > >> >> > >> <dependencyManagement> >> > >> <dependencies> >> > >> ... >> > >> <dependency> >> > >> <groupId>aspectj</groupId> >> > >> <artifactId>aspectjrt</artifactId> >> > >> <version>1.2.1</version> >> > >> </dependency> >> > >> >> > >> specifies version 1.2.1 - I would have expected the two to be the >> same? >> > >> >> > >> == >> > >> >> > >> There are several maven.xml and project.xml files in the directory >> > >> tree - are these still current? >> > >> >> > >> > > >> > >> > > What is your opinion expressed by any of the three numbers :-). >> > >> > > >> > >> > > >> > >> > > On Mon, Jan 19, 2009 at 10:33 PM, Petar Tahchiev < >> > >> > > [email protected]> wrote: >> > >> > > >> > >> > > > Hi guys, >> > >> > > > >> > >> > > > here comes the second attempt for >> > >> > > > releasing cactus-1.8.1. >> > >> > > > >> > >> > > > The artifacts, hashes and signatures are here: >> > >> > > >> > >> > > > >> > http://people.apache.org/~ptahchiev/1.8.1-rc2/<http://people.apache.org/%7Eptahchiev/1.8.1-rc2/> >> <http://people.apache.org/%7Eptahchiev/1.8.1-rc2/> >> > >> <http://people.apache.org/%7Eptahchiev/1.8.1-rc2/> >> > >> > > > >> > >> > > > The tagged code-base is here: >> > >> > > > >> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/jakarta/cactus/tags/1.8.1-rc2/ >> > >> > > > >> > >> > > > I think it is OK this time. >> > >> > > > >> > >> > > > Here is my +1 >> > >> > > > >> > >> > > > >> > >> > > > Please vote. >> > >> > > > >> > >> > > > Thanks. >> > >> > > > >> > >> > > > -- >> > >> > > > Regards, Petar! >> > >> > > > Karlovo, Bulgaria. >> > >> > > > >> > >> > > > EOOXML objections >> > >> > > > http://www.grokdoc.net/index.php/EOOXML_objections >> > >> > > > >> > >> > > > Public PGP Key at: >> > >> > > > >> > >> >> http://keyserver.linux.it/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x1A15B53B761500F9 >> > >> > > > Key Fingerprint: AA16 8004 AADD 9C76 EF5B 4210 1A15 B53B >> 7615 >> > >> 00F9 >> > >> > > > >> > >> > > >> > >> > > >> > >> > > >> > >> > > -- >> > >> > > Regards, Petar! >> > >> > > Karlovo, Bulgaria. >> > >> > > >> > >> > > EOOXML objections >> > >> > > http://www.grokdoc.net/index.php/EOOXML_objections >> > >> > > >> > >> > > Public PGP Key at: >> > >> > > >> > >> >> http://keyserver.linux.it/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x1A15B53B761500F9 >> > >> > > Key Fingerprint: AA16 8004 AADD 9C76 EF5B 4210 1A15 B53B 7615 >> 00F9 >> > >> > > >> > >> > >> > >> >> > >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> > >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] >> > >> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] >> > >> >> > >> >> > > >> > > >> > > -- >> > > Regards, Petar! >> > > Karlovo, Bulgaria. >> > > >> > > EOOXML objections >> > > http://www.grokdoc.net/index.php/EOOXML_objections >> > > >> > > Public PGP Key at: >> > > http://keyserver.linux.it/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x1A15B53B761500F9 >> > > Key Fingerprint: AA16 8004 AADD 9C76 EF5B 4210 1A15 B53B 7615 00F9 >> > > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > -- >> > >> > Regards, Petar! >> > Karlovo, Bulgaria. >> > >> > EOOXML objections >> > http://www.grokdoc.net/index.php/EOOXML_objections >> > >> > Public PGP Key at: >> > http://keyserver.linux.it/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x1A15B53B761500F9 >> > Key Fingerprint: AA16 8004 AADD 9C76 EF5B 4210 1A15 B53B 7615 00F9 >> > >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] >> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] >> >> > > > -- > Regards, Petar! > Karlovo, Bulgaria. > > EOOXML objections > http://www.grokdoc.net/index.php/EOOXML_objections > > Public PGP Key at: > http://keyserver.linux.it/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x1A15B53B761500F9 > Key Fingerprint: AA16 8004 AADD 9C76 EF5B 4210 1A15 B53B 7615 00F9 > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
