I tried to make it as easy as possible but maybe I could have done more. This is a complicated issue because of the classloading so it requires installation of a dependency in the repository to fully reproduce the issue. See the updated comment in the issue for the exact steps I just took to reproduce it with the original test case.
Regardless of the specifics on this issue, I would have expected that if the test case was broken or someone was confused, that a comment would be added. That's the part that is frustrating: when you hear nothing on an issue and it gets bounced. I can appreciate that if it's too hard to reproduce or isn't very important, fine just say so. At least then I know why and can see what I can do to help. -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Carlos Sanchez Sent: Monday, February 20, 2006 4:42 PM To: Maven Developers List Subject: Re: Rationale for which bugs make a release? Well, the easier the test case is to use the faster it's solved. If i have to spend a lot of time just setting up the environment it's likely that it'll be delayed. Please see my attached test cases for a better test case fully automated. On 2/20/06, Brian E. Fox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > The jar is included in the other attachment. It's hard to see with all > the other comments, but this is how to reproduce: > > "Install the jar in test-1.0.zip to the local repo and build the > plugin in test-case. Run the plugin by using mvn test:enhance > > In 2.0 it will print where it found the factory class, in 2.0.1 it > will crash " > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of > Carlos Sanchez > Sent: Monday, February 20, 2006 4:28 PM > To: Maven Developers List > Subject: Re: Rationale for which bugs make a release? > > The test case attached doesn't work, there're missing dependencies > > On 2/20/06, Brian E. Fox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I guess I'm a little confused about how something is decided which > > release a fix goes into. Here's a good example: MNG-1898. This is > > functionality that was broken between 2.0 and 2.0.1. It is listed as > > a > > > blocker and has reproducible test cases associated with it, yet this > > one didn't make the 2.0.3 release. The test case has been attached > > since just before 2.0.2 was released. > > > > Don't get me wrong, you guys have done geat work, but it's > > discouraging to see so many issues get bumped from revision to > revision. > > > > > > > -- > I could give you my word as a Spaniard. > No good. I've known too many Spaniards. > -- The Princess Bride > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For > additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For > additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > -- I could give you my word as a Spaniard. No good. I've known too many Spaniards. -- The Princess Bride --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
