> On May 9, 2016, 7:03 p.m., Mark Bretl wrote: > > geode-core/build.gradle, line 130 > > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/47129/diff/1/?file=1376862#file1376862line130> > > > > Same thoughts as Anthony, this looks to add a circular dependency. > > > > If this is the case, feels like tests are in the wrong project... > > Jens Deppe wrote: > I could see why you think that, however the reason for this is that we're > try to enable http-based gfsh testing for exactly the same test code which > uses regular gfsh access (jmx). We're doiong this by parameterizing the JUnit > tests. We could split them up, but then we'd end up with identical code > duplicated in -core and -assembly. I also don't think it's quite appropriate > to move all the tests into -assembly as they're not relying on a full product > tree. > > Dan Smith wrote: > Would it be cleaner just add tests to geode-web that extend the > geode-core tests? That way you wouldn't duplicate the code, but you wouldn't > introduce a circular dependencies of geode-web->geode-core->geode-web.
OK, I think we'll do that. - Jens ----------------------------------------------------------- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/47129/#review132309 ----------------------------------------------------------- On May 9, 2016, 5:31 p.m., Jens Deppe wrote: > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > https://reviews.apache.org/r/47129/ > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > (Updated May 9, 2016, 5:31 p.m.) > > > Review request for geode, Jinmei Liao, Kirk Lund, and Dan Smith. > > > Repository: geode > > > Description > ------- > > GEODE-1361: Provide location of geode-web war for use in geode-core > > > Diffs > ----- > > geode-core/build.gradle 45051dc771452bf06ba6708efd8e1361791e13e8 > geode-web/build.gradle 5bd1d8949c1b1379ddd6a1bd8ab2751ce73a79fd > > Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/47129/diff/ > > > Testing > ------- > > > Thanks, > > Jens Deppe > >
