Hi Roman, thanks to you, you can't immagine how I was worried to have broken something! :D Thanks a lot, have a nice day! Simo
http://people.apache.org/~simonetripodi/ On Mon, Mar 29, 2010 at 10:09 AM, Roman Stumm <[email protected]> wrote: > Am 28.03.10 14:40, schrieb Simone Tripodi: >> >> Hi all guys, >> package move has been done, I took advantage to update a small subset >> of metadata on parent pom, according to new apache info. >> Once terminated, I also reported the BVAL-11 issue that I wasn't able >> to fix alone, as Kevan suggested I committed the code so the community >> can help to resolve the issue. >> One small question: is (agimatec) 0.9.6 version still fine for bval? >> I'd propose to change it to 0.1-SNAPSHOT, how does it sound to you? >> Best regards, have a nice Sunday!!! >> Sim >> >> http://people.apache.org/~simonetripodi/ >> >> >> >> On Sun, Mar 28, 2010 at 11:47 AM, Simone Tripodi >> <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> >>> Hi Donald, >>> I 100% support your idea, I'd raise the same question once terminated >>> this task :) >>> Thanks for your hint, going to commit in a while!!! :) >>> Have a nice Sunday, >>> Simo >>> >>> http://people.apache.org/~simonetripodi/ >>> >>> >>> >>> On Sun, Mar 28, 2010 at 12:34 AM, Donald Woods<[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> I was thinking about collapsing everything into one artifact. The >>>> current code structure is because agimatec-validation contains the core >>>> engine/metadata handler, which was shared with pre-JSR303 code that >>>> Agimatec had, while the agimatec-jsr303 was the add-on layer to fulfill >>>> the spec requirements. >>>> >>>> For now, lets rename the artifacts as: >>>> agimatec-validation --> bval-core >>>> agimatec-jsr303 --> bval-jsr303 >>>> >>>> We'll use another JIRA to combine everything or BVAL-1 to split things >>>> into an impl and api jar..... >>>> >>>> I'll try to take a look at the test failures tonight or tomorrow, but go >>>> ahead with the commit and we'll figure it out from there. >>>> >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> Donald >>>> >>>> >>>> On 3/27/10 1:14 PM, Simone Tripodi wrote: >>>> >>>>> >>>>> Hi Kevan, >>>>> thank you very much for your feedbacks!!! I'm going to commit the code >>>>> at this status, I just need to know: if org.apache.bval fits well in >>>>> groupId, which artifacts Id do we have to use? Do you have any >>>>> suggestion? >>>>> Thanks a lot!!! >>>>> Simo >>>>> >>>>> http://people.apache.org/~simonetripodi/ >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Sat, Mar 27, 2010 at 4:12 PM, Kevan Miller<[email protected]> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Mar 27, 2010, at 8:51 AM, Simone Tripodi wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Hi all mates, >>>>>>> I'm going to complete the issue but I need you help for 2 small >>>>>>> issues I have: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> 1) should I move also groupId and artifactId in poms? >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Yes, I definitely think so. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> 2) in the jsr-303 module I've 28 failures over 81 tests, I attached >>>>>>> on >>>>>>> this email the .txt junit reports, is anyone able to explain me why >>>>>>> they fail so I can fix them? >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Sorry, I really haven't looked at the code at all, yet... IMO, it's >>>>>> absolutely fine for you to commit the code in it's current form. At this >>>>>> stage, I don't think anyone would object that the code has test failures. >>>>>> Plus committing will allow others to help out... No reason for this to be >>>>>> solely on your shoulders. >>>>>> >>>>>> Thanks for doing this! >>>>>> >>>>>> --kevan >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> > > Hi Simone, > > thanks for renaming! I fixed Issue 11, so that all tests are successful now. > > Roman >
