[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Any chance one of you guys could also incorporate my simple patch to the
FTP task that adds the "initialcommand" attribute?
http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34853
Thanks,
John
This e-mail message and any attachments may contain confidential,
proprietary or non-public information. This information is intended
solely for the designated recipient(s). If an addressing or transmission
error has misdirected this e-mail, please notify the sender immediately
and destroy this e-mail. Any review, dissemination, use or reliance upon
this information by unintended recipients is prohibited. Any opinions
expressed in this e-mail are those of the author personally.
Steve Cohen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 12/05/2005 08:38:39 PM:
Antoine Levy-Lambert wrote:
Steve Cohen wrote:
However, it does seem to me that this test case is rather incomplete,
and could be beefed up in several ways to test these and other recent
features of commons-net which are not being tested here.
Feel free to expand this test. I created this test to check that the
pattern selection features of the ftp task work, when I refactored it.
Makes sense, I suppose. You would presume that commons-net has its own
tests (indeed it does) and therefore only test the interaction with Ant.
I guess what I am asking is what the scope of these tests is. Who
runs them, when, and how? (Do they change the password as I had
to?).
I believe almost no one runs these tests, except committers who are
changing the ftp task. To make this test work in gump, there would be
the need to install on the gump machine a standard ftp server used to
run the tests.
In commons-net we have tests that ARE part of gump and can be run
anywhere and then we have tests that are NOT part of gump (we call them
functional tests) since they depend on various ftp servers over which we
have no control. These tests are only run manually, although they
should pass, assuming the server is up, from anywhere, without
modification or -D definition. (they use anonymous FTP). Do you think
it would make sense to add such tests here? Or should I just be testing
that the new attributes are accepted by Ant properly?
I am eager to test the time zone feature in Ant, which virtually
requires an external ftp server and could be very useful in Ant. The
other new features, concerning languages other than English, etc., are,
in my experience harder to test because there are so few servers that
work that way anymore. Almost all the publicly accessible ftp servers
have converted to English month names. I know because I looked all over
the place and could find not a single one that didn't! I presume that
the non-English server complaints we occasionally hear about concern
various private intra-company servers that use older ftp servers. If it
ain't broke, don't fix it. Apparently older ftp servers actually called
"ls" and the newer ones don't. This will become even more moot as
all-numeric timestamps become more prevalent in unix ftp servers - I
recently learned that Debian is now shipping this way and hope this a
wave of the future.
I've also committed install.html to indicate that from here forward,
commons.net >= 1.4.0 is required.
If commons.net 1.4.0 is required, is it not a big constraing for the
1.6.4 release ?
Indeed. I was proceeding on Stefan's instructions to put it into the
HEAD and have a vote later about adding them to 1.6.4. If the Ant team
does not feel confident about requiring 1.4.0 so soon this vote will
fail.
I am working on revised manual page for the ftp task which has
optional new attributes but I want to tweak that a bit more.
+1
Antoine
Steve
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Not in the 1.6.4 timeframe, but I will be happy to take a look, soon.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
