GitHub PR 139 - Support white-box modular test compilation

Hi Maven devs, I implemented some open ends in the maven-compiler-plugin's support for jpms. Basically the plugin now supports module descriptors in test source directories, that declare the "reads" or "requires" dependencies. See https://github.com/apache/maven-plugins/pull/139 Cheers,

Re: ASM library not compatible with plexus-java:0.9.3 in Maven build

Nit: plexus-java:0.9.7 refers to ASM 6.1 which was superseded by ASM 6.1.1 So, an upgrade to ASM 6.1.1 in plexus-java:0.9.8 would be great as that version [1] fixed two bugs in ClassReader. [1] http://asm.ow2.io/versions.html

Re: Welcome Christian Stein to the Apache Maven Team

On Mon, May 7, 2018 at 10:01 PM Robert Scholte <rfscho...@apache.org> wrote: > Hi, > > On behalf of the Apache Maven PMC I am pleased to announce that Christian > Stein (sor) has been voted in as a new Apache Maven committer. > > Christian, welcome on board and have a lot of f

Re: Welcome Christian Stein to the Apache Maven Team

On Mon, May 7, 2018 at 11:48 PM Tibor Digana wrote: > Welcome! > I hope Christian is online. > No, wasn't online when you wrote the mail. > We are working on JUnit5 provider in Surefire together and I see we have > quite a good progress step by step. So I think we will

Re: ASM library not compatible with plexus-java:0.9.3 in Maven build

> > Hi, > > > > On 07/05/18 10:23, Christian Stein wrote: > >> Nit: plexus-java:0.9.7 refers to ASM 6.1 which was superseded by ASM > >> 6.1.1 > >> > >> So, an upgrade to ASM 6.1.1 in plexus-java:0.9.8 would be great as that > >> version [1]

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Maven Surefire Plugin version 2.22.0

On Sat, Jun 16, 2018 at 10:45 AM Tibor Digana wrote: > +1 from me > Thx for vote. I will promote the artifacts to Maven Central and finish the > release process! > > Wohoo! (-:

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Maven Surefire Plugin version 2.22.0

Thanks for testing, Dan! Got a similar feedback from a JUnit 5 early adopter: "It's all good. Runs pretty smooth with different JUnit in different modules. I know I had some issues with that before." Same goes for the "junit5-samples": all 3 (simple) project work with 2.22.0

IRC Chat

Hi Maven-Devs, tried to join #maven-dev via http://webchat.freenode.net but it does not work like it used to do. I guess, one has to Auth to services: [ ] now, but which user/pass is required? Do I have to create an account at freenode.net? Cheers, Christian

Re: IRC Chat

On Fri, Aug 17, 2018 at 2:41 PM Fred Cooke wrote: > Yes, create an account, spam attack = +r set on most channels and > registration required to enter. Hope that helps. > > Okay, understood. But, can't find a registration page at https://freenode.net Can you please point me to it ... or are the

Re: IRC Chat

On Sat, Aug 18, 2018 at 12:14 AM Olivier Lamy wrote: > remember we have an asf slack > IMHO it's better as it's saved (i.e async readable) whereas irc is not so > you can unplug laptop, timezone difference and definitely cannot follow > conversations... > why not moving? > > Because I didn't

Re: issue with junit 5 integration

No, it works with Surefire 2.22.0 and JUnit 5.3. Just add (or move) the test-runtime dependencies to the Surefire plugin element: maven-surefire-plugin 2.22.0 org.junit.jupiter

Re: issue with junit 5 integration

On Wed, Sep 5, 2018 at 6:49 PM Tibor Digana wrote: > >> Yes but the platform and engine are transitive, right? > Yes. We can grab the classpath from the forked jvm via Jconsole and we > should see these artifacts. > > @Christian > what happens when you just add new Engine with another version to

Re: issue with junit 5 integration

On Wed, Sep 5, 2018 at 10:22 AM Romain Manni-Bucau wrote: > From what I saw in the code the surefire provider artifact is resolved to > ... So, specifying that artifact in your setup (explicit or implicit) will lead to the correct version to be loaded. See the integration tests in Surefire,

Re: issue with junit 5 integration

On Wed, Sep 5, 2018 at 10:07 AM Stephane Nicoll wrote: > How do I reproduce this problem concretely? Having to specify a dependency > in surefire is not an option for us as we want the JUnit5 provider to be > detected automatically. > > I've upgraded a Spring Boot project to use 5.3.0 and I

Review of Maven Plugin "junit-platform-maven-plugin"

Hi all, I wrote my first Maven Plugin: "junit-platform-maven-plugin" [1]. It is a convenient wrapper starting the JUnit Platform Console Launcher [2]. I'd appreciate a quick review if I followed the common and recommended standards for writing Maven Plugins. I opened an issue to gather any

Re: issue with junit 5 integration

So. Initial results are in. Setting only: 3.0 ...leads to the exception Romain reported. Version 1.2.0 of the Platform is resolved. Sorting out the test compile- and runtime dependencies fixes the issue: See https://github.com/apache/meecrowave/pull/11 for details. Now, making Surefire

Re: [VOTE] ASF Parent POM Version 20

I second that what Tibor said. On Wed, Jul 4, 2018 at 8:50 PM Tibor Digana wrote: > You could use latest Surefire 2.22.0 - fixed docker, introduced JUnit 5. >

[compiler plugin] Support JPMS test modules

Hi everybody, I filed a PR against AbstractCompilerMojo and TestCompilerMojo some days ago [1] and would like to discuss it. The PR introduces support for test sources organized as modules and solves the inline comment reading " // maybe some extra analysis required " in the TestCompilerMojo. A

Re: [compiler plugin] Support JPMS test modules

is is a long standing with to do whitebox testing, even though > some others JPMS experts don't agree ;) > My comment did indicate i had no idea at that time what to do with it, so > maybe this is the right fix to support all combinations. > > thanks, > Robert > > On Mon, 16 Ap

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Maven Surefire Plugin version 2.22.1

' .travis.yml' is excluded from 'rat-check' here: https://github.com/apache/maven-surefire/blob/master/pom.xml#L605 Why does check fail and how did the 2.22.0 release handle the issue? On Mon, Oct 8, 2018 at 10:53 AM Enrico Olivelli wrote: > Seems that apache-rat:check fails with: > > Files

Re: [VOTE] Maven Plugin Tools 3.6.0

+1 (non-binding) Tested maven-plugin-plugin 3.6.0 with OpenJDK 11 at https://github.com/sormuras/junit-platform-maven-plugin/commit/31e0cff0eea92ceec594ba67a5f505c884235d14 Cheers, Christian On Mon, Oct 29, 2018 at 5:34 AM Olivier Lamy wrote: > Hi > I'd like to release Maven plugin Tools

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Maven Surefire Plugin version 3.0.0-M1 - TAKE 2

+1 Nit: some transitive dependency requires "asm-7.0-beta" -- should be updated to GA version of ASM 7.0 Cheers, Christian Downloading from xwiki-releases:

Re: Welcome Sylwester Lachiewicz to the Apache Maven Team

High 5 and welcome Sylwester!

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Maven Surefire Plugin version 3.0.0-M3

+1 Cheers, Christian Simple project using Surefire 3.0.0-M3: https://github.com/junit-team/junit5-samples/commit/a8660d636058a52fc68f7a9d6a5a11b42ee44303 Result: https://travis-ci.org/junit-team/junit5-samples/jobs/470432909 On Thu, Dec 20, 2018 at 10:48 AM Tibor Digana wrote: > Hi, > > We

Re: New committer: Enrico Olivelli

Hi Enrico!

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Maven Surefire Plugin version 3.0.0-M2

+1 Cheers, Christian

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Maven Shared Archiver version 3.3.0

+1 On Sat, Nov 17, 2018 at 2:45 PM Karl Heinz Marbaise wrote: > Hi, > > We solved 10 issues: > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12317922=12341347 > > There are still a couple of issues left in JIRA: > >

Re: GitHub "merge button" is active ?

I do use the button now and then. I'd vote to install https://github.com/apps/wip which disables the button on GitHub ... "allow authors of pull requests to set status to pending while still working on it." Cheers, Christian On Wed, Dec 19, 2018 at 3:57 PM Enrico Olivelli wrote: > Hi, > I see

Re: Surefire maintenance release

On Wed, Mar 27, 2019 at 6:14 PM Enrico Olivelli wrote: > Il mer 27 mar 2019, 18:10 Tibor Digana ha > scritto: > > > Enrico, what i maintenance release for you, 2.22.2-M1? > > > > 2.22.2 without suffix > > This.

Re: Surefire maintenance release

Hi all, here are my 0.02 € on the two issues/PRs that went into Surefire 3.x already. *SUREFIRE-1546 "JUnit 5 display names"* Both, supporting "@DisplayName" and therefore also backporting https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SUREFIRE-1546 to the 2.x branch makes almost *no* sense to me.

Re: Surefire maintenance release

Hi Stéphane, due to JavaLand and other "business stuff", I'll plan to review your branch early next week. >From a first glimps, it looks good to me. Cheers, Christian On Wed, Mar 20, 2019 at 9:26 AM Enrico Olivelli wrote: > +1 > > Il mar 19 mar 2019, 22:29 Olivier Lamy ha scritto: > > >

Re: Surefire maintenance release

On Thu, Apr 11, 2019 at 8:09 AM Enrico Olivelli wrote: > This is the final branch from which I will cut the release. > https://github.com/apache/maven-surefire/tree/release/2.22.2 > > Re-launched Jenkins to check for the last time: > >

Define a standard for test reports

Hi Maven devs, especially Maven Surefire people, you're both invited and very welcome to participate in defining "a standard for test reports" at [1]. TLDR: The goal here is to have a common format which testing frameworks and build tools can understand, so that, for example, JUnit (producer)

Re: Anyone had an error on Eclipse IDE after upgrade maven-jar-plugin to 3.1.2?

On Sat, Jun 8, 2019 at 6:14 PM Mickael Istria wrote: > [...] > Then seeing such negative comments towards them, which are more about > opinion than technical facts, seems really not encouraging to contribute > more to Maven. [...] It's the 2nd time in a short time-frame I find your comments

Re: [shade plugin] common code with gradle shadow plugin?

proguard plays in the same realm. Olivier Lamy schrieb am Mo., 15. Juli 2019, 13:02: > Hi > Sounds a good idea! > > On Sat, 13 Jul 2019 at 04:30, Romain Manni-Bucau > wrote: > > > Hello (again) everyone, > > > > Gradle shadow plugin - kind of shade plugin for gradle - forked Apache > > Maven

Re: New Commiter: Elliotte Rusty Harold

Cheers, Elliote! On Fri, Dec 13, 2019 at 8:39 PM Enrico Olivelli wrote: > Welcome! > > Kudos > > Enrico > > Il ven 13 dic 2019, 19:31 Martin Gainty ha scritto: > > > welcome Elliotte! > > > > martin > > > > > > From: Karl Heinz Marbaise > > Sent: Friday,

Re: Maven GroupID authority

On Fri, Feb 14, 2020 at 6:37 AM Manfred Moser wrote: > From the very start of the work on the module system and throughout the > work people from the Maven project have been involved. > > There was never a willingness to create any sort of enforcement.. only a > request to the community to do

Re: Maven GroupID authority

On Fri, Feb 14, 2020 at 8:11 AM Hervé BOUTEMY wrote: > on that precise case ("commons" instead of "org.apache.commons"), it's > from > past Maven 1 repository format time. > > then such case is not added to Central for years, only projects that > existed > at early Maven 1 repository time (like

Re: source directory layout for multirelease jars

Robert (?) wrote this page [0] about supporting MR-JAR files. There're several approaches to the topic. It'd be nice, if the compiler- and the jar-plugin would pick one by default or based on a directory layout convention. [0]:

Re: source directory layout for multirelease jars

On Fri, May 1, 2020 at 1:52 PM Hervé BOUTEMY wrote: > when the need is restricted META-INF/versions/9/module-info.class, ie not > really code per Java release, but only module or not module, isn't one > strategy better to use, given there should be less tests to be run? > > perhaps the answer is

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Maven Surefire Plugin version 2.22.3

On Mon, May 4, 2020 at 5:17 PM Romain Manni-Bucau wrote: > Le lun. 4 mai 2020 à 17:06, Stephane Nicoll a > écrit : > > > Thanks but that doesn't really answer my question. That version is picked > > up by dependency management of the project as far as I can tell. If a > > project does provide

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Maven Surefire Plugin version 2.22.3

On Mon, May 4, 2020 at 6:45 PM Romain Manni-Bucau wrote: > Le lun. 4 mai 2020 à 18:30, Stephane Nicoll a > écrit : > > ... > OK. Why is our build failing with that error if we're importing the JUnit > > 5.5.2 bom and it does not fail if we're importing the JUnit 5.6.2 bom? > Our > > test

Re: Welcome the new Maven committers: Maarten Mulders en Martin Kanters

Happy coding and testing, Maarten and Martin! On Fri, Jul 10, 2020 at 9:13 PM Robert Scholte wrote: > Hi, > > On behalf of the Apache Maven PMC I am pleased to announce that > Maarten Mulders en Martin Kanters has been voted in as new Apache Maven > committers > and they've both accepted this

Re: maven-source-plugin broken on Windows + JDK8

Hi, Why do you think it's the Windows node, Robert? For me, it [1] says 5 times: linux-jdk8-m3.6.x_build The file separator chars displayed in the log file also points to a Linux node: > > [INFO] The post-build script did not succeed. assert buildLog.text =~ > /(?i) Archive

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Maven JLink Plugin version 3.0.0

+1 (non-binding) On Wed, Nov 11, 2020 at 11:15 PM Karl Heinz Marbaise wrote: > Hi, > > We solved 37 issues: > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12321432=12343851 > > There are still a couple of issues left in JIRA: > >

Re: JPMS compile problems

: > > > > I think you need to talk with Christian Stein about blackbox and > whitebox testing. > > > > Robert > > On 25-4-2021 08:47:20, Ralph Goers wrote: > > I am trying to convert Log4j 2 to be fully modularized and am running > into problems with

Re: JPMS compile problems

On Sun, Apr 25, 2021 at 4:53 PM Apache wrote: > Thanks Christian. I’ve read that blog several times. It helped me > immensely in getting anything to work. You're welcome and glad to hear that it helped you! > However, it doesn’t exactly cover my situation where some of the test > classes

Re: Future of maven scripting plugin, java?

On Fri, Feb 26, 2021 at 12:42 PM Robert Scholte wrote: > I remember the same discussion with Christian Stein. > Yeah, me too. Came up with a JSR223 wrapper POC implementation around that time: https://github.com/sormuras/java-compiler-script-engine Maybe it's of help here - if not, then not. (-:

Re: JUnit Platform, forkCount > 1 and the TestPlan

On Fri, Sep 10, 2021 at 8:27 PM Emond Papegaaij wrote: > [...] For now, I think the LauncherSession is the best way to at least provide > some hooks for pre and post fixtures. It shouldn't be too hard to get this > in the current code base with backwards compatibility for JUnit Platform > 1.7

Re: JPMS data as first-class citizen of the POM

On Fri, Nov 5, 2021 at 7:55 AM Olivier Cailloux wrote: > ... > Armed with this rich information, Maven could auto-generate the module- > info.java file before compiling the code; auto-generate the alternative > module-info.java file before compiling and running the tests; > ... That's like

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Maven Surefire Plugin version 3.0.0-M6

+1 Upgrading all Maven-based sample projects from Surefire 2.22.0 to 3.0.0-M6 seems to work fine. https://github.com/junit-team/junit5-samples/pull/168 Cheers, Christian On Thu, Mar 31, 2022 at 2:35 PM Tibor Digana wrote: > Hi, > > We solved 111 issues: > >

Re: [HEADS UP] Release of surefire

+ M10 ... erm +1 for releasing 3.0.0 On Thu, Mar 9, 2023 at 10:36 AM Slawomir Jaranowski wrote: > Hi, > > According to https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MNG-7725 > I would like to release the next version of surefire. > > Next radical proposal: switch version to 3.0.0 and stop producing

Re: [VOTE] Require Java 17 for Maven 4

+1 On Wed, Feb 28, 2024 at 8:31 AM Benjamin Marwell wrote: > Hi Maven Devs/Users/Committers and PMC members! > > After several discussions on the mailing lists, I would like to > start a vote in favour of setting the minimal Java bytecode target > of Maven-Core 4 to 17 and hence require Java 17

Re: [DISCUSS] Maven Dependency Plugin

I use the "resolve" goal like this: mvn --batch-mode --no-transfer-progress -DoutputFile=resolved.txt org.apache.maven.plugins:maven-dependency-plugin:3.6.1:resolve ...and parse the output for Java module names and whether they are "automatic".

Re: Compiler bug: Issues with JPMS module version

The commit you linked contains a test for "1.0-SNAPSHOT", a valid version string according to Java's module descriptor version schema as defined here: https://docs.oracle.com/en/java/javase/21/docs/api/java.base/java/lang/module/ModuleDescriptor.Version.html "HEAD-SNAPSHOT" fails due to it

Re: Compiler bug: Issues with JPMS module version

On 2024/03/06 07:15:11 Sam Gammon wrote: > I hadn't noticed that test, thank you. That's very helpful, maybe, then, > Guava's string HEAD-jar-SNAPSHOT​ can simply be a change to > 1.0-HEAD-jar-SNAPSHOT​. That feels like the best solution to me: you opt-in to be a Java module, you also