Yup, agreed, and based on that, here's my +1, binding.
Thanks and kudos for the quick investigation!
CheersBruno

      From: Stefan Bodewig <bode...@apache.org>
 To: Commons Developers List <dev@commons.apache.org> 
 Sent: Friday, 12 May 2017 9:44 PM
 Subject: Re: [compress] ZIP Integration Tests (was Re: [VOTE] Release Compress 
1.14 Based on RC1)
   
On 2017-05-12, Stefan Bodewig wrote:

> On 2017-05-12, Stefan Bodewig wrote:

>> On 2017-05-12, Stefan Bodewig wrote:

>>> I'll run the tests myself to see what happens here.

>> $ mvn test 
>> -Dtest=Zip64SupportIT#writeSmallStoredEntryKnownSizeToFileModeAlways 
>> -Prun-zipit

>> ...

>> Failed tests:
>>  
>>Zip64SupportIT.writeSmallStoredEntryKnownSizeToFileModeAlways:1618->withTemporaryArchive:2323
>> arrays first differed at element [4]; expected:<64> but was:<-1>

>> Tests run: 1, Failures: 1, Errors: 0, Skipped: 0

>> I'll try to understand what's going on.

> First data point, it has been failing since 1.11, it passes with 1.10.

> I'll wade through the changes we've made to ZipArchiveOutputStream, at
> first glance the test verifies what I'd expect the archive to contain.

https://github.com/apache/commons-compress/pull/10

we forgot to adapt the test, will do so now.

Given the test was wrong, not the implementation I think I don't need to
cancel the vote.

Stefan

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org



   

Reply via email to