Grand so
On 8 February 2010 11:47, Benjamin Bentmann wrote:
> Stephen Connolly wrote:
>
> How will I write a plugin that works for both 2.x and 3.x and can detect
>> if
>> the build is running in parallel?
>>
>
> /** @parameter default-value="${session.parallel}" */
> private Boolean parallel;
>
Stephen Connolly wrote:
How will I write a plugin that works for both 2.x and 3.x and can detect if
the build is running in parallel?
/** @parameter default-value="${session.parallel}" */
private Boolean parallel;
Benjamin
On 8 February 2010 11:20, Kristian Rosenvold
wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 8, 2010 at 10:58 AM, Stephen Connolly <
> stephen.alan.conno...@gmail.com> wrote
>
> >
> > >I think it would be acceptable to break a build if forkmode=never and
> > >parallel build=true... i.e. have the maven api's expose the fact
On 8 February 2010 11:23, Benjamin Bentmann wrote:
> Kristian Rosenvold wrote:
>
> Anyone have any suggestions on how plugins should find out if
>> they're being run in parallel ?
>>
>
> Add a getter to the MavenSession that allows plugins to query the current
> mode of operation.
>
>
How will I
Kristian Rosenvold wrote:
Anyone have any suggestions on how plugins should find out if
they're being run in parallel ?
Add a getter to the MavenSession that allows plugins to query the
current mode of operation.
Benjamin
---
On Mon, Feb 8, 2010 at 10:58 AM, Stephen Connolly <
stephen.alan.conno...@gmail.com> wrote
>
> >I think it would be acceptable to break a build if forkmode=never and
> >parallel build=true... i.e. have the maven api's expose the fact that we
> are
> >running in a parallel build, and then surefire
On 8 February 2010 09:18, Kristian Rosenvold
wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 8, 2010 at 2:32 AM, Brett Porter wrote:
>
> >
> > On 07/02/2010, at 6:16 AM, Kristian Rosenvold wrote:
> >
> > > I just discovered that the source of the hideous concurrency problem
> > > I've been tracking for some time is the sys
On Mon, Feb 8, 2010 at 2:32 AM, Brett Porter wrote:
>
> On 07/02/2010, at 6:16 AM, Kristian Rosenvold wrote:
>
> > I just discovered that the source of the hideous concurrency problem
> > I've been tracking for some time is the system property "user.dir".
>
>
> > Surefire basically sets the follo
On 07/02/2010, at 6:16 AM, Kristian Rosenvold wrote:
> I just discovered that the source of the hideous concurrency problem
> I've been tracking for some time is the system property "user.dir".
>
> Surefire basically sets the following three system properties:
>
> "basedir" = basedir.getAbsolut
I just discovered that the source of the hideous concurrency problem
I've been tracking for some time is the system property "user.dir".
Surefire basically sets the following three system properties:
"basedir" = basedir.getAbsolutePath()
"user.dir" = workingDirectory.getAbsolutePath();
"localRep
10 matches
Mail list logo
