Dan Fabulich schrieb:
> The sad tale of SUREFIRE-491 began when I tried to fix SUREFIRE-121.
>
> http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/SUREFIRE-491
> http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/SUREFIRE-121
>
> The request seemed innocent enough. Wouldn't it be cool if you could
> pass system properties to your
You could always namespace off system properties that should be passed
to the forked process, e.g. -Dtest.foo=bar would pass in -Dfoo=bar.
Mark
2008/5/2 Dan Fabulich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Brett Porter wrote:
>
>
> > I thought I had commented on this at some point, but I don't really
> remember.
Brett Porter wrote:
I thought I had commented on this at some point, but I don't really remember.
You're plan of action sounds correct if there's no way around it. You might
however look into the changes John made in 2.0.9 to separate CLI properties
from existing system properties - maybe we
I thought I had commented on this at some point, but I don't really
remember.
You're plan of action sounds correct if there's no way around it. You
might however look into the changes John made in 2.0.9 to separate CLI
properties from existing system properties - maybe we can just support
The sad tale of SUREFIRE-491 began when I tried to fix SUREFIRE-121.
http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/SUREFIRE-491
http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/SUREFIRE-121
The request seemed innocent enough. Wouldn't it be cool if you could pass
system properties to your tests, like this?
mvn clean te
