Thanks Lewis.
--- *G. Ann CAMPBELL* | SonarSource Product Owner http://sonarsource.com On Mon, Oct 26, 2015 at 10:54 PM, Lewis John Mcgibbney < [email protected]> wrote: > Hi G. Ann, > > This is actually my fault and I should not have left the tests in this > state. > In the meantime I think that we should retain the testFailureIgnore boolean > value as false as we want to know when something is broken. > > I'll try and have a look into the failing tests this week. Thank you very > much for dropping in. Great to hear that you guys are doing large scale > source code analysis with such attention to detail. > Lewis > > On Mon, Oct 26, 2015 at 6:21 PM, <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > Nemo SonarQube analysis of Gora > > <http://nemo.sonarqube.org/dashboard/index/792699> has been failing > since > > 6 > > Oct. on this: > > > > Results : > > > > Failed tests: > > testGetWithFields(org.apache.gora.memory.store.MemStoreTest): > > expected:<null> but was:<Random Joe> > > > > Tests in error: > > > > > testMemStoreDeleteByQueryFields(org.apache.gora.memory.store.MemStoreTest) > > > > > > Build fails in the Core module. > > > > Note that our SOP is to build with -Dmaven.test.failure.ignore=true. > > However, the main pom sets <testFailureIgnore>false</testFailureIgnore> > on > > line 490, so these test failures must be resolved before we can analyze. > > > > > > Help? > > Ann > > > > > > --- > > *G. Ann CAMPBELL* | SonarSource > > Product Owner > > http://sonarsource.com > > > > > > > -- > *Lewis* >
