2010/1/11 Kristian Rosenvold <[email protected]>: > I think SUREFIRE-555 needs to be reverted. There is a problem in the log > output when running the tests, and the output log does not properly reflect > the status of the running tests. While this would've affected only a > microscopic number of users 7 months ago, the 4.7 range has gotten > sufficiently mainstream that this i unacceptable today. junit 4.7 is > "default" in spring 3. > > The issue applies only when the new provider is used, and that is only for > users of junit [4.7,). I will fix the problem, but I don't think it should > delay the release. >
Any respin will delay the release. We either go with what we have deployed to the staging repo today, or we call a vote again (a.k.a. take 3) Are you saying you're -1 on 2.5 as is? My personal view is that there is nothing stopping us from doing 2.5.1 tomorrow, i'd rather get 2.5 out today unless somebody is -1. Also, can you file a JIRA, we can always release note the logging output being incorrect when using 4.7 and parallel threading (or is it 4.7 no matter what) -Stephen > Kristian > > > > > On Mon, Jan 11, 2010 at 1:10 AM, Stephen Connolly < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> planning on casting a vote at all? >> >> >> Sent from my [rhymes with tryPod] ;-) >> >> On 10 Jan 2010, at 21:19, Dennis Lundberg <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Stephen Connolly wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Sent from my [rhymes with tryPod] ;-) >>>> >>>> On 9 Jan 2010, at 14:09, Dennis Lundberg <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>> Stephen Connolly wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> 2010/1/9 Stephen Connolly <[email protected]>: >>>>>> >>>>>>> 2010/1/9 Dennis Lundberg <[email protected]>: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Stephen Connolly wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Hi, >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> We solved 15 issues: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> http://jira.codehaus.org/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=10541&version=14119&styleName=Html >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> There are still a couple of issues left in JIRA: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> http://jira.codehaus.org/secure/IssueNavigator.jspa?reset=true&pid=10541&status=1 >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Staging repo: >>>>>>>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/maven-019/ >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Staging site(s): >>>>>>>>> http://maven.apache.org/plugins/maven-surefire-plugin-2.5/ >>>>>>>>> http://maven.apache.org/plugins/maven-failsafe-plugin-2.5/ >>>>>>>>> http://maven.apache.org/plugins/maven-surefire-report-plugin-2.5/ >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> The plugin sites are all empty. Only the directories were created. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> I'm looking into that now. >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> site:stage-deploy didn't stage the plugins... >>>>>> >>>>>> I had to stage them by hand... also because i'm on a linux machine, >>>>>> the links on the LHS are all borked (see m-c-p-2.1, but they will be >>>>>> fixed for a real deploy, see m-c-p) >>>>>> >>>>>> You'll have to wait for the mirror sync or use the special proxies to >>>>>> see the sites >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Thanks >>>>> >>>>> I've been reading the docs and just realized that the site for Failsafe >>>>> Plugin is pretty much a copy of the Surefire Plugin site. We can't have >>>>> two sets of near-identical pages - it's a maintenance nightmare. >>>>> >>>>> What I would like to do is merge the Failsafe goals into the Surefire >>>>> Plugin. This would effectively get rid of one set of pages. Well almost, >>>>> there are some new bits in the Failsafe site that would need to be >>>>> merged as well. >>>>> >>>>> It might be that this is impossible for practical usage reasons, as I >>>>> must confess that I am not an expert on tests. >>>>> >>>>> >>>> for a whole host of reasons, it is better two keep these as two separate >>>> plugins. for 2.6 I will refactor both so that the common code is in a >>>> common module, but I felt it was better to get 2.5 out first >>>> >>> >>> Agreed >>> >>> we can have the common site pages in the common module as an attached >>>> artifact and unpack the apt.vm files in the pre-site phase, or else just >>>> link to the common module directly >>>> >>> >>> How about we keep the index, usage and FAQ pages in failsafe plugin. The >>> example pages stay in surefire plugin, and we just link to them from the >>> failsafe plugin site? >>> >>> If they are separate plugins their respective sites should be separate >>> as well. We just need to figure out a good way to handle info that >>> applies to both plugins. >>> >>> the main driving force for keeping failsafe as a separate plugin is >>>> where you define failsafe with a default execution in pluginMgmt in the >>>> parent pom. >>>> >>>> now child projects can have integration tests by just adding >>>> >>>> <plugin><artifactId>maven-failsafe-plugin</artifactId></plugin> >>>> >>>> to build/plugins >>>> >>>> since surefire is part of the default lifecycle, if we merged to one, >>>> then the pluginMgmt entry would force integration tests on all modules >>>> >>> >>> I figured there was a good reason for it :-) >>> >>> >>>> >>>>> >>>>>> -Stephen >>>>>> >>>>>> http://maven.apache.org/surefire/staging/ >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Guide to testing staged releases: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> http://maven.apache.org/guides/development/guide-testing-releases.html >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Vote open for 72 hours. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> [ ] +1 >>>>>>>>> [ ] +0 >>>>>>>>> [ ] -1 >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] >>>>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>> Dennis Lundberg >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>>>> 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] >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> Dennis Lundberg >>>>> >>>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>> 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] >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> -- >>> Dennis Lundberg >>> >>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> 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] >> >> > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
