[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MENFORCER-408?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
 ]

Sylwester Lachiewicz reassigned MENFORCER-408:
----------------------------------------------

    Assignee: Sylwester Lachiewicz

> Regression test for dependency convergence problem fixed in 3.0.0
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: MENFORCER-408
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MENFORCER-408
>             Project: Maven Enforcer Plugin
>          Issue Type: Test
>          Components: Plugin
>    Affects Versions: 3.0.0
>            Reporter: Alexander Kriegisch
>            Assignee: Sylwester Lachiewicz
>            Priority: Major
>             Fix For: 3.0.0
>
>
> About 5 years ago, I reported a dependency convergence issue (back then for 
> 1.4.1), but accidentally in the Extra Enforcer Rules bug tracker where it was 
> simply forgotten or ignored despite a reproducing test case:
> https://github.com/mojohaus/extra-enforcer-rules/issues/28
> Back then, neither I nor any committer noticed that I had posted in the wrong 
> bug tracker. Had anybody even so much as taken a closer look, this would have 
> been noticed. In the meantime, the bug still existed until and including 
> 3.0.0-M3 and was only recently fixed for 3.0.0 in [commit 
> ca40308f|https://github.com/apache/maven-enforcer/commit/ca40308fd58c45e638a35768b3966b5680d4c60e]
>  as a side-effect of upgrading maven-dependency-tree.
> Because [~slachiewicz] told me that new integration tests shielding the 
> plugin from regression bugs are welcome, I am going to create a PR containing 
> the corresponding IT. I already verified that it fails as expected before 
> commit ca40308f and passes afterwards. So if for whatever reason the problem 
> resurfaces, the IT will catch it. It also documents that there actually was a 
> problem which was fixed rather accidentally by upgrading a dependency.



--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.20.7#820007)

Reply via email to