On 21/01/2009, Henri Yandell <[email protected]> wrote:
> Yep - turning off my local JIRA got me passed that problem and now I
>  get the same set of errors as Seb.
>

Does this always happen for you?

If so, what is the path it is trying to find?
This would require testing against trunk...

>  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]
>
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]

Reply via email to