t;> I had a reason to use easytesting in Surefire855 IT - it's only IT, the
>> main
>> code is not affected, just upgrade to JDK6. I can skip this test in JDK5,
>> do
>> you want me to do that? We will switch to JDK 6 in Maven 3 - I hope soon.
>>
>
that? We will switch to JDK 6 in Maven 3 - I hope soon.
>
>
>
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://maven.40175.n5.nabble.com/Surefire-Plugin-does-not-handle-workingDirectory-in-fork-mode-properly-tp5824054p5825274.html
> Sent
5, do
you want me to do that? We will switch to JDK 6 in Maven 3 - I hope soon.
--
View this message in context:
http://maven.40175.n5.nabble.com/Surefire-Plugin-does-not-handle-workingDirectory-in-fork-mode-properly-tp5824054p5825274.html
Sent from the Maven Developers mailing list archi
t;> > >
>> > >> Hi Norbert,
>> > >> I have updaated PR #82 with comment on GitHub.
>> > >> The Ubuntu builds fail.
>> > >> I would prefer keeping the test anyway.
>> > >> Try to find a solution for Ubuntu as
#82 with comment on GitHub.
> > >> The Ubuntu builds fail.
> > >> I would prefer keeping the test anyway.
> > >> Try to find a solution for Ubuntu as well; otherwise use JUnit
> > assumption
> > >> statement
> > >> assumeThat( os, anyOf( is
>> I would prefer keeping the test anyway.
> >> Try to find a solution for Ubuntu as well; otherwise use JUnit
> assumption
> >> statement
> >> assumeThat( os, anyOf( is( "Windows" ), is( "Ubuntu1" ) ) )
> >> in the particular IT meth
thod, possibly unit test.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> View this message in context:
>> http://maven.40175.n5.nabble.com/Surefire-Plugin-does-not-handle-workingDirectory-in-fork-mode-properly-tp5824054p5824683.html
>> Sent from the Maven Developers ma
; in the particular IT method, possibly unit test.
>
>
>
>
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://maven.40175.n5.nabble.com/Surefire-Plugin-does-not-handle-workingDirectory-in-fork-mode-properly-tp5824054p5824683.html
&g
particular IT method, possibly unit test.
--
View this message in context:
http://maven.40175.n5.nabble.com/Surefire-Plugin-does-not-handle-workingDirectory-in-fork-mode-properly-tp5824054p5824683.html
Sent from the Maven Developers mailing list a
; We had the same issue in JUnit project. Alrerady reported in JIRA
> >> http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MANIMALSNIFFER-54
> >> http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MANIMALSNIFFER-40
> >> I would like to have the check-test goal or a new parameter.
> >> It's stil
or a new parameter.
>> It's still assigned to @stephenc.
>> I would appreciate it working and utilized in Maven and JUnit projects.
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> View this message in context:
>> http://maven.40175.n5.nabble.com/Surefire-Plugin
> View this message in context:
> http://maven.40175.n5.nabble.com/Surefire-Plugin-does-not-handle-workingDirectory-in-fork-mode-properly-tp5824054p5824348.html
> Sent from the Maven Developers mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
> --
x27;s still assigned to @stephenc.
I would appreciate it working and utilized in Maven and JUnit projects.
--
View this message in context:
http://maven.40175.n5.nabble.com/Surefire-Plugin-does-not-handle-workingDirectory-in-fork-mode-properly-tp5824054p5824348.html
Sent from the Maven Devel
Hi Norbert,
Oh, I misses that one as well - our animal sniffer seems to put its nose
only into the main classes.
A new pull-request would be great.
Am Dienstag, 20. Januar 2015 schrieb Norbert Wnuk :
> Hi Andreas,
> The JDK API level is not enforced during build so that my accidental usage
> of
Hi Andreas,
The JDK API level is not enforced during build so that my accidental usage
of JDK 1.7 API in tests was not discovered till recent Jenkins build:
https://builds.apache.org/job/maven-surefire/1385/ Should I create new pull
request / what is the procedure after closing original pull reques
JIRA created, pull request with more mature fix attached (including
integration test).
https://jira.codehaus.org/browse/SUREFIRE-1136
https://github.com/apache/maven-surefire/pull/80
Regards,
NW
On Mon, Jan 19, 2015 at 8:03 AM, Karl Heinz Marbaise
wrote:
> Hi Norbert,
>
> It's great that you a
Hi Norbert,
It's great that you asking for permission to create a jira but you don't
need to just create one and describe the situation etc. why and how it
went wrong or what can be improved and of course your patch is really
great...but it would be much easier if you could either provide a te
Hi Norbert,
sounds great! To create a Jira-Issue for surefire [1], you just need to
sign-up on xircles [2].
You can attach your path to the Jira issue, if you like. The most fluent
way to suggest patches is by making a pull-request on GitHub where we can
directly discuss the patch.
In the end, f
Hi All,
Not sure whether this is a proper place however Surefire webpage redirects
to this mailing group.
Recently we found two issues in Surefire plugin related to
surefire.forkNumber variable and ability to define separate working
directory per forked JVM. First issue is that the same directory i
19 matches
Mail list logo
