On 1 April 2012 06:18, Stefan Bodewig <bode...@apache.org> wrote: > On 2012-04-01, Ralph Goers wrote: > >> I have real problems with Gump. I find it very difficult to determine >> what the problem actually is much less diagnose it. Other than that I >> know it is supposed to be using the latest source in trunk it is tough >> to figure out how to reproduce a problem as it means manually going to >> all the dependencies and building them from trunk and then modifying >> poms to use them. > > Agreed, but I wouldn't know of a simpler way to do it. In theory you > could do a bisect on all changes of all dependencies until you identify > the change that introduced a breakage on the Gump side, but that's > non-trivial and will likely never happen given the limited development > resources at Gump. > > Of course the process is easier for projects with a small transitive > hull of dependencies 8-) > >> I know its purpose is to try to catch errors early, but it looks to me >> like people are just giving up trying to fix them. Frankly, I think >> the only reason people do tis to try to stop the emails. > > I think you are correct. Many projects have stopped seeing value in > Gump and only view it as a nuisance (or ignore it), I don't know what to > do about it either.
Or educate people on why the Gump errors can be useful? And how to debug them... It recently found a bug in a Lang test case (different order of test execution exposed cleanup failures). And this particular error seems to be the same cause (see else-thread). > Another way to get rid of the emails is to remove the nag element from > the Gump descriptor. > > Stefan > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
