I'll check the diff. On Mon, Mar 25, 2019 at 3:38 PM Stephane Nicoll <stephane.nic...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hey, > > Can someone working on surefire confirm the interest of creating that > branch in the main repo and kick-off a release if a review is satisfactory? > > Thanks! > S. > > > On Wed, Mar 13, 2019 at 4:09 PM Stephane Nicoll <stephane.nic...@gmail.com > > > wrote: > > > 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 > >> > > >> > > >
