Stephen Connolly wrote:
> Here is the test plan.
>
> 1. We (=benjamin) run all the builds that are currently working with
> m3+plugin-enfocer+new surefire plugin -SNAPHOT. If all builds still
> pass with the new surefire plugin, then we say all is good
>
> 2. If all is good, we (=benjamin or me
Please put them in if you don't mind. I seem to remember that at least
one int-test was missing the license even before I added my additional
test. I will add the license plugin to idea :)
Kristian
Den 4. jan. 2010 kl. 10.50 skrev Stephen Connolly
:
> SUREFIRE-555 looks good.
>
> I just have som
On 2010-01-04, at 4:50 AM, Stephen Connolly wrote:
> SUREFIRE-555 looks good.
>
> I just have some questions w.r.t. the licensing
>
> Some of the integration test java classes do not seem to have the ASL
> header... does this matter?
>
Kristian will likely have a CLA on file shortly. You can p
SUREFIRE-555 looks good.
I just have some questions w.r.t. the licensing
Some of the integration test java classes do not seem to have the ASL
header... does this matter?
-Stephen
2010/1/4 Stephen Connolly :
> will do
>
> Sent from my [rhymes with tryPod] ;-)
>
> On 3 Jan 2010, at 23:45, Brett
will do
Sent from my [rhymes with tryPod] ;-)
On 3 Jan 2010, at 23:45, Brett Porter wrote:
There was a patch (SUREFIRE-555) by Kristian that looked good, but I
didn't get time to look at it in detail and apply/test it. If you
have time to do that while you are doing the testing that'd be g
There was a patch (SUREFIRE-555) by Kristian that looked good, but I didn't get
time to look at it in detail and apply/test it. If you have time to do that
while you are doing the testing that'd be great.
- Brett
On 02/01/2010, at 10:47 PM, Stephen Connolly wrote:
> Here is the test plan.
>
http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/SUREFIRE-584
2010/1/3 Stephen Connolly :
> OK, Surefire is currently un-releaseable due to how the integration
> tests are written.
>
> I will start reworking them tomorrow.
>
> I will also merge failsafe's goals into surefire since I'm touching the code
>
> Once I
OK, Surefire is currently un-releaseable due to how the integration
tests are written.
I will start reworking them tomorrow.
I will also merge failsafe's goals into surefire since I'm touching the code
Once I have fixed things then I will roll the release
-Stephen
2010/1/2 Stephen Connolly :
>
I am going to merge the two together, but i'd like to get 2.5 out first
2010/1/2 Paul Benedict :
> I remember hearing about the fail-safe plugin... Are you going to
> merge into surefire? I think the best choice is to eliminate competing
> plug-ins and aggregating new functionality in one.
>
> Pau
I remember hearing about the fail-safe plugin... Are you going to
merge into surefire? I think the best choice is to eliminate competing
plug-ins and aggregating new functionality in one.
Paul
On Sat, Jan 2, 2010 at 6:25 AM, Stephen Connolly
wrote:
> i'm fine with moving my code from mojo to mav
i'm fine with moving my code from mojo to maven... when I wrote
failsafe I was not an apache committer...
I'd like to sort out scoping toolchains before doing that though
so I was thinking 2.6 could be the merged version
I'd plan on pushing 2.6 in a month or so (i.e. before m3)
-Stephen
2010/1/
And what about the failsafe plugin
This one is very useful and is a copy of surefire dedicated to its with
junit.
Couldn't we move it to Apache and use a shared lib to update them all
together ?
Couldn't we integrate it by default in maven 3 in the lifecycle ?
WDYT ?
Arnaud Héritier
Software Fact
Here is the test plan.
1. We (=benjamin) run all the builds that are currently working with
m3+plugin-enfocer+new surefire plugin -SNAPHOT. If all builds still
pass with the new surefire plugin, then we say all is good
2. If all is good, we (=benjamin or me or somebody else) stage a
release of
13 matches
Mail list logo
