Didn't you send to the wrong list?
2015-06-18 23:59 GMT+02:00 Dan Tran :
> do we still stage at nexus.codehaus.org?
>
> Thanks
>
> -D
>
> On Thu, Jun 18, 2015 at 12:50 PM, Stephen Connolly <
> stephen.alan.conno...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > More asking about what minimum parent version, etc and hav
Surely groovy is the way to go, i agree
Le 18 juin 2015 21:42, "Tibor Digana" a écrit :
> There are plenty of requests like
> streaming classes from socket into the plugin and executing
> system properties in execution like you proposed
> different test set or using class loader per test or TestN
do we still stage at nexus.codehaus.org?
Thanks
-D
On Thu, Jun 18, 2015 at 12:50 PM, Stephen Connolly <
stephen.alan.conno...@gmail.com> wrote:
> More asking about what minimum parent version, etc and have any releases
> been cut yet to prove the process
>
> On Thursday, June 18, 2015, Manfred
There are plenty of requests like
streaming classes from socket into the plugin and executing
system properties in execution like you proposed
different test set or using class loader per test or TestNG groups per
exeution, but not the Maven execution
So I committed a proposal in a branch and we w
More asking about what minimum parent version, etc and have any releases
been cut yet to prove the process
On Thursday, June 18, 2015, Manfred Moser wrote:
> I assume whatever was done at codehaus in the past.
>
> But from my perspective - you think its ready. Just do it ;-)
>
> manfred
>
>
>
>
That is the point. If not built in it has almost no value compared to
groups since i doubt you ll write a plugin to a mvn plugin in your project
- needs to be seriously generic for your business to do it IMO.
That said there are open doors for tests filtering for surefire without
relying on the ba
I think it would not be difficult to dictate the SurefireProvider to use
specific JUnit runner or implement SurefireProvider by yourself and specify
then SPI class for it and list plugin dependency with the provider.
You can of course use Maven executions or just repeat the invoke().
We want to pr
I assume whatever was done at codehaus in the past.
But from my perspective - you think its ready. Just do it ;-)
manfred
Stephen Connolly wrote on 18.06.2015 09:32:
> https://github.com/mojohaus/extra-enforcer-rules/
>
> is one I'd like to cut...
>
--
We need one more vote please.
--
View this message in context:
http://maven.40175.n5.nabble.com/VOTE-Release-Apache-Maven-Shared-Utils-version-0-8-tp5837727p5837889.html
Sent from the Maven Developers mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
-
https://github.com/mojohaus/extra-enforcer-rules/
is one I'd like to cut...
Hi
I use more and more arquillian and applicationcomposer (from tomee project)
to rwite my tests. Issue is you can't use both in the same JVM is test
ordering is random (ie 1 arquillian, 1 appcomposer, 1 appcomposer, 1
arquillian, ...).
Of course I could use a custom sorter but I think surefire c
+1
> On Jun 18, 2015, at 2:53 AM, Karl Heinz Marbaise wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> here is my +1.
>
> Kind regards
> Karl Heinz Marbaise
> On 6/16/15 10:15 PM, Karl Heinz Marbaise wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> We solved 2 issues:
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12317421&versio
Hi Tibor,
On 6/18/15 1:42 PM, Tibor Digana wrote:
It's truth that we upgrade the JDK version for Maven distrib in 3.3/jdk7 and
3.2/jdk6 and not the compiler.
From the users perspective I would also suppose the compiler changed.
On the other side migrating all plugins takes time. Due to mo
It's truth that we upgrade the JDK version for Maven distrib in 3.3/jdk7 and
3.2/jdk6 and not the compiler.
>From the users perspective I would also suppose the compiler changed.
On the other side migrating all plugins takes time. Due to most of them
still depend on Maven API 2.2.1. It takes some t
Hi Jason,
Jason Pyeron wrote:
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Manfred Moser [mailto:manf...@mosabuam.com]
>> Sent: Thursday, June 18, 2015 12:21 AM
>> To: dev@maven.apache.org
>> Subject: Re: Default Maven Compiler Version
>>
>> Yes... a corporate or some other higher level pom is
>
> I
> -Original Message-
> From: Manfred Moser [mailto:manf...@mosabuam.com]
> Sent: Thursday, June 18, 2015 12:21 AM
> To: dev@maven.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Default Maven Compiler Version
>
> Yes... a corporate or some other higher level pom is
I think some detail was missed in the OP's
Done
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MSHARED-426
--
View this message in context:
http://maven.40175.n5.nabble.com/Broken-build-on-maven-shared-utils-tp5837795p5837850.html
Sent from the Maven Developers mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Sorry I was in the office till 10 PM so I was dead yesterday.
I will do it now.
--
View this message in context:
http://maven.40175.n5.nabble.com/Broken-build-on-maven-shared-utils-tp5837795p5837846.html
Sent from the Maven Developers mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
---
18 matches
Mail list logo
