robert burrell donkin
Wed, 05 Sep 2001 09:56:59 -0700
On Wednesday, September 5, 2001, at 01:51 PM, Rodney Waldhoff wrote: >> i couldn't help noticing that the build.xml uses a <java> (ant) task to >> perform the tests. the latest version of ant has quite a nice task that >> does junit testing that i've used before and i think works pretty well. > >>> In particular, I might be a stick in the mud, but I'd like it to still >>> run on the Ant 1.3 production release :-). As long as that works, I'm >>> fine with updating to Ant's internal JUnit task. i'm running ant 1.4 and i know that the junit stuff has changed since 1.3. so craig's probably right about this being an issue. > I'm all for the <junit> task actually (it gives better output among other > features), but in the spirit of "Don't take down a fence unless you know > the reason it was put up in the first place", just a reminder: > > We had originally set up several of the commons build scripts to use the > <junit> task rather than a <java> task, and then changed it back because > the former required a particular (although not difficult) configuration > of Ant to work properly (namely setting up the junit task itself), while > <java> simply required the right classpath. the junit task does have some nice functionality but it's probably better to postpone changing to use it until the commons upgrades to ant 1.4. IMHO in the long run, i think we should try to change to use the junit task and work on documenting it (and the 'commons' build process) better. - robert