On 5 Jul 07, at 7:40 AM 5 Jul 07, Mark Hobson wrote:
On 05/07/07, Jason van Zyl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Sorry, while separating the base class for reuse I forgot to put that
back. For the time being it's still supposed to be there. I've put it
back. The intent was the put the abstract class
On 05/07/07, Jason van Zyl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Sorry, while separating the base class for reuse I forgot to put that
back. For the time being it's still supposed to be there. I've put it
back. The intent was the put the abstract class in a separate project
so that it could be used by the I
On 5 Jul 07, at 4:19 AM 5 Jul 07, Mark Hobson wrote:
Hi there,
I'm wondering what the intended way of running the ITs are now.
r551806 saw the demise of IntegrationTestSuite which
Sorry, while separating the base class for reuse I forgot to put that
back. For the time being it's still supp
On 05/07/2007, at 11:19 PM, Mark Hobson wrote:
On 05/07/07, Brett Porter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I haven't tried it, but I prefer not having suite if it works.
Doesn't the surefire plugin (2.2+) list all the failed tests at
completion so you know which ones to look into? That means the ord
On 05/07/07, Brett Porter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I haven't tried it, but I prefer not having suite if it works.
Doesn't the surefire plugin (2.2+) list all the failed tests at
completion so you know which ones to look into? That means the order
probably isn't important.
Yeah, I did notice
I haven't tried it, but I prefer not having suite if it works.
Doesn't the surefire plugin (2.2+) list all the failed tests at
completion so you know which ones to look into? That means the order
probably isn't important.
- Brett
On 05/07/2007, at 9:23 PM, Mark Hobson wrote:
On 05/07/07,
I haven't tried it, but I prefer not having suite if it works.
Doesn't the surefire plugin (2.2+) list all the failed tests at
completion so you know which ones to look into? That means the order
probably isn't important.
- Brett
On 05/07/2007, at 9:23 PM, Mark Hobson wrote:
On 05/07/07,
On 05/07/07, Mark Hobson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi there,
I'm wondering what the intended way of running the ITs are now.
r551806 saw the demise of IntegrationTestSuite which
Tell a lie, it was r551681.
core-integration-tests/pom.xml still references, so mvn test runs no
tests. Commenti
Hi there,
I'm wondering what the intended way of running the ITs are now.
r551806 saw the demise of IntegrationTestSuite which
core-integration-tests/pom.xml still references, so mvn test runs no
tests. Commenting t+his out results in running the ITs in random
order with verbose output, making i
Hi there,
I'm wondering what the intended way of running the ITs are now.
r551806 saw the demise of IntegrationTestSuite which
core-integration-tests/pom.xml still references, so mvn test runs no
tests. Commenting t+his out results in running the ITs in random
order with verbose output, making i
I think this could be a useful exercise in determining just how "embeddable"
Maven really is, since it's bound to expose cached instance state and other
similar problems that will carry over from test to test...not just a problem
of garbage collection.
As a way of reviewing Maven itself, it's a v
On 22 Jan 07, at 2:42 PM 22 Jan 07, Carlos Sanchez wrote:
Hi,
I started to take a look on what it takes to run all the it tests with
the embedder besides the current command line approach.
I was thinking in making Validator an interface with two
implementations, command line validator and emb
Carlos Sanchez wrote:
Hi,
I started to take a look on what it takes to run all the it tests with
the embedder besides the current command line approach.
I was thinking in making Validator an interface with two
implementations, command line validator and embedded validator.
Then the desired v
Hi,
I started to take a look on what it takes to run all the it tests with
the embedder besides the current command line approach.
I was thinking in making Validator an interface with two
implementations, command line validator and embedded validator.
Then the desired validator would be injecte
On Mar 30, 2006, at 5:27 PM, Brett Porter wrote:
I would suggest patching against the branch - there is a definite
slow down on trunk at the moment.
AOK—I'll do that.
As for the wedge - does that happen repeatedly?
Ugh, it finished this time, in about 2 minutes or so. I am not
instilled
I would suggest patching against the branch - there is a definite slow
down on trunk at the moment.
As for the wedge - does that happen repeatedly?
- Brett
Gordon Henriksen wrote:
> I'm just trying to build m2's trunk locally so I can submit a patch. I
> followed the directions, but there seem t
I'm just trying to build m2's trunk locally so I can submit a patch.
I followed the directions, but there seem to be something awry.
First of all, each one of the integration test takes a bloody
eternity to run. Like a minute. Second, it0094 is (still) wedged
after 20 minutes! It's alive, b
[ http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MNG-352?page=all ]
Brett Porter closed MNG-352:
Resolution: Won't Fix
I'm going to assume this is becuase of MNG-350, please reopen if that is not
the case
> Running integration tests: java.lang.NoClass
Running integration tests: java.lang.NoClassDefFoundError:
org/apache/maven/it/Verifier
---
Key: MNG-352
URL: http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MNG-352
Project: m2
Type: Bug
19 matches
Mail list logo
