Hello Olivier,
We can continue with the next work in parallel if you agree.
Basically two things to do. The Java 7 and API 3.0.
The branch 3.0-rc-1 already exists. So would rather take this because I
know the branch and it contains a lots of 3.0 commits which need to be
squashed in one and master
Let's see if I have to send a new email.
The release notes, deployment and SHA1 are related to right version. Only
the title is bad.
On Sat, Mar 3, 2018 at 12:46 PM, Enrico Olivelli
wrote:
> Thank you !
> I will test on my company projects as soon as possible (maybe monday).
>
> nit: is The sub
Thank you !
I will test on my company projects as soon as possible (maybe monday).
nit: is The subject of the vote thread wrong ?
Enrico
2018-03-03 12:44 GMT+01:00 Tibor Digana :
> The e-mail went out. The vote has started.
> Should I mention how to run the build with other JDK and follow the
The e-mail went out. The vote has started.
Should I mention how to run the build with other JDK and follow the
README.md on GitHub?
On Fri, Mar 2, 2018 at 8:16 PM, Enrico Olivelli wrote:
> Il ven 2 mar 2018, 19:43 Tibor Digana ha scritto:
>
> > I will close the Jira Version and I will complete
Il ven 2 mar 2018, 19:43 Tibor Digana ha scritto:
> I will close the Jira Version and I will complete all preparation for the
> release vote tomorrow morning.
>
Great!
Enrico
>
> On Fri, Mar 2, 2018 at 6:02 PM, Enrico Olivelli
> wrote:
>
> > I see SUREFIRE 1491 is on master, eo we have a green
I will close the Jira Version and I will complete all preparation for the
release vote tomorrow morning.
On Fri, Mar 2, 2018 at 6:02 PM, Enrico Olivelli wrote:
> I see SUREFIRE 1491 is on master, eo we have a green light?
> Thank you Tibor
>
> Il gio 1 mar 2018, 22:38 Olivier Lamy ha scritto:
>
I see SUREFIRE 1491 is on master, eo we have a green light?
Thank you Tibor
Il gio 1 mar 2018, 22:38 Olivier Lamy ha scritto:
> Ok Sounds good.
> But could we just focus on a new release rather than new issues?
>
>
>
>
> On 1 March 2018 at 14:20, Tibor Digana wrote:
>
> > There is a branch SURE
Ok Sounds good.
But could we just focus on a new release rather than new issues?
On 1 March 2018 at 14:20, Tibor Digana wrote:
> There is a branch SUREFIRE-1491 waiting for pushing to master. It is open
> for everybody who want to check it:
> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=maven-su
There is a branch SUREFIRE-1491 waiting for pushing to master. It is open
for everybody who want to check it:
https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=maven-surefire.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/heads/SUREFIRE-1491
Here is the Jenkins build link
https://builds.apache.org/job/maven-wip/job/maven-surefire/
Hi
Inline
On 1 March 2018 at 12:55, Tibor Digana wrote:
> Hi Olivier,
>
> Please do not make it yet - I am in progress with fixing.
> I am still running several branches on Jenkins. The Jira issues in 2.21.0
> match branch name, as for instance today's SUREFIRE-1491.
> After 1491 the next ones w
Hi Olivier,
Please do not make it yet - I am in progress with fixing.
I am still running several branches on Jenkins. The Jira issues in 2.21.0
match branch name, as for instance today's SUREFIRE-1491.
After 1491 the next ones will be cosmetic changes - quite fast to do.
I would like to start the
Ok - that's planned work for TestNG too - so I'll defer it until the
next one.
I'll start planning the 2.3 release.
On 23/02/2007, at 10:25 AM, Tom Huybrechts wrote:
I'm using it in production without issues.
One thing that could be improved is that the junit4 provider now looks
at the file
I'm using it in production without issues.
One thing that could be improved is that the junit4 provider now looks
at the filename to find tests, instead of looking for @Test
annotations.
Tom
On 2/22/07, Jason van Zyl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 22 Feb 07, at 5:00 PM 22 Feb 07, Brett Porter
It works in some instances, with certain versions of testNG. But
there are a number of problems, especially with newer versions.
On 23/02/2007, at 9:15 AM, Brian E. Fox wrote:
I haven't been tracking the testNG support in detail but does this
mean
it's currently still not working? It's been
Ok, I think that's a pre-existing problem though.
So unless I hear any objections, I'l call a vote for surefire 2.3
(including junit4) later today.
On 23/02/2007, at 9:12 AM, Arnaud HERITIER wrote:
We use it actually, and we didn't find real problems.
Just one annoying : If there's no depen
I haven't been tracking the testNG support in detail but does this mean
it's currently still not working? It's been a while since we tried
it...currently we are launching via ant but this is less than optimal
because it doesn't work with reports and things like cobertura.
-Original Message---
We use it actually, and we didn't find real problems.
Just one annoying : If there's no dependency for a test framework in the
project, we receive a NPE. I don't yet open an issue about this.
Arnaud
On 2/22/07, Brett Porter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Good idea.
Does anyone know if the junit4
On 22 Feb 07, at 5:00 PM 22 Feb 07, Brett Porter wrote:
Good idea.
Does anyone know if the junit4 support is 'production ready'?
I think if anyone can find Tom he's been using it as he made the
initial patches but have not used it myself.
jason.
- Brett
On 23/02/2007, at 3:39 AM, Jas
Good idea.
Does anyone know if the junit4 support is 'production ready'?
- Brett
On 23/02/2007, at 3:39 AM, Jason van Zyl wrote:
Hey Brett,
If you are going to do a push for TestNG do you think you might be
able to push out a release to get the 20 or so issues out into the
wild before di
19 matches
Mail list logo
