Sounds good to have a maintenance release with this! On Thu, 14 Mar 2019 at 04:34, Enrico Olivelli <eolive...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Very good! > > Enrico > > Il mer 13 mar 2019, 16:09 Stephane Nicoll <stephane.nic...@gmail.com> ha > scritto: > > > Hey, > > > > I've created a `2.22.x` branch based on the 2.22.1 tag and I've > > cherry-picked the issue we need to get proper support for the vintage > > engine[1] > > > > This 2.22.2-SNAPSHOT works for our purpose so I was wondering if more > fixes > > could be backported and/or if someone would like to review those changes. > > > > Thanks, > > S. > > > > > > [1] https://github.com/snicoll/maven-surefire/tree/2.22.x > > > > On Wed, Feb 27, 2019 at 1:46 PM Tibor Digana <tibordig...@apache.org> > > wrote: > > > > > Hi Stephane, > > > > > > We are talking only about these two commits [1]? > > > Notice that 001e807 modifies file names to the verbose one which breaks > > > backwards compatibility and this should not forcibly (by default) > happen > > in > > > your version/branch. > > > Try to fork the project, make a local branch and then reset HEAD to > [2], > > > i.e. git reset --hard 19006aa70f36705f399b8c105a16f636904f00f3 > > > And then cherrypick both commits [1]. > > > Make sure the order is correct but it won't be so straightforward. The > > > tests have to pass (mvn install -P run-its). > > > > > > [1]: > > > > > > > > > https://github.com/apache/maven-surefire/commit/f517d349ede0e15229e3c48f45d10dabc72a3fc9 > > > > > > > > > https://github.com/apache/maven-surefire/commit/001e8075b8db7861aaefb5af4c256d919a9b2e7a > > > > > > [2]: > > > > > > > > > https://github.com/apache/maven-surefire/commit/19006aa70f36705f399b8c105a16f636904f00f3 > > > > > > Cheers > > > Tibor > > > > > > On Mon, Feb 25, 2019 at 8:54 AM Stephane Nicoll < > > stephane.nic...@gmail.com > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > Hi everyone, > > > > > > > > It's great to see the progress on Surefire 3.0 and I wanted to reach > > out > > > to > > > > discuss a practicable problem with the 2.x line. There are a number > of > > > > fixes for JUnit 5 that are only available in the 3.x line that isn't > GA > > > > yet. [1][2] > > > > > > > > Putting my Spring Boot hat for a min, this actually prevents us from > > > > upgrading our test support to JUnit 5: our plan is to offer maximum > > > > flexibility by providing the vintage engine (so that users can keep > > their > > > > tests and migrate at their own pace). > > > > > > > > We can't upgrade to a milestone as our upgrade policy prevents that > > > > (regardless of how stable this is and especially since backward > > > > incompatible changes have been pushed to the latest milestone). So > > we're > > > > kind of stuck. > > > > > > > > Would there be an appetite to backport those fixes and release a > > 2.22.2? > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > S. > > > > > > > > [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SUREFIRE-1614 > > > > [2] > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/projects/SUREFIRE/issues/SUREFIRE-1546 > > > > > > > > > > -- Olivier Lamy http://twitter.com/olamy | http://linkedin.com/in/olamy
