On 2/11/06, Sean Schofield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
1.0.0 is officially alpha, but there's been lots of improvements in the test framework since then. (And, a lot of improvements and new features in the other areas too.)
Craig
I don't know enough about our Mock objects or Shale to say whether
this is a good idea but I suspect it is a good idea.
Now that commons is released you can add new mock stuff there. Just
don't add the tests to impl for a day or two until we create the
branch. Make sense?
I'd like to know more about your proposal for using Shale. It sounds
like it would be a good idea but I don't personally have the time to
investigate it.
@Craig: Is Shale officially alpha yet?
1.0.0 is officially alpha, but there's been lots of improvements in the test framework since then. (And, a lot of improvements and new features in the other areas too.)
Craig
@Wendy: There are snapshots being posted now right?
Sean
On 2/11/06, Dennis Byrne < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I have a couple unit tests for org.apache.myfaces.config w/ a dependency on some of the stuff in org.apache.myfaces.mock.api . This causes a build error.
>
> I take it tests in impl cannot have build deps on stuff from the tests in api ? Will moving the mock classes to commons solve this ? And if so, will this interfere/complicate the current staged release activities .
>
> If I can get enough votes to replace all of our Mock objects with Shale, I will do the grunt work.
>
> Dennis Byrne
>
>
>
