No, it's a Java 1.5 method that snuck into Shale Test 1.0.3-snapshot.
I should have been more clear about that.

https://issues.apache.org/struts/browse/SHALE-251

But yeah, that would be good for us as well.

On 8/11/06, Dennis Byrne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Perhaps we can also get mvn to enforce this in local development as well?

Mike, Did you mean 1.1.3 snap ?

Dennis Byrne

>-----Original Message-----
>From: Mike Kienenberger [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Sent: Friday, August 11, 2006 07:46 PM
>To: 'MyFaces Development'
>Cc: 'Craig McClanahan'
>Subject: Re: Heads Up on Shale Test Framework API Change
>
>Speaking of breakage, there's a Java 1.5 method dependency in the
>1.0.3-snapshot, which is causing MyFaces to fail to build with testing
>enabled (the default) under Java 1.4.
>
>https://issues.apache.org/struts/browse/SHALE-251
>
>It'd be great if we could get this fixed at the same time.
>
>It'd probably be a good idea if Shale had an automated way to catch
>Java 1.4 incompatibilities right away.
>
>This brings up another issue.   Should MyFaces 1.1 be requiring Java
>1.4 to run tests?  We're obligated to provide 1.3 support for the core
>as it stands.   My personal thoughts are that requiring 1.4 to run the
>tests isn't the end of the world, but should at least be documented
>somewhere.
>
>Do we have continuum set up to build the core with Java 1.3 to insure
>there aren't any Java 1.4 methods sneaking into the code?
>
>
>On 8/11/06, Craig McClanahan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> We're looking at implementing a suggestion[1] to change the API on the
>> setUp() and tearDown() methods of
>> org.apache.shale.test.base.AbstractJsfTestCase, to add
>> "throws Exception" to the method signatures.  The primary goal is to be
>> consistent with the underlying TestCase class from JUnit 3.8.1, and to allow
>> test developers to go ahead and let JUnit handle exceptions here like you
>> often do when you add "throws Exception" to individual test methods.
>>
>> Implementing this change, of course, will cause all existing test cases that
>> extend this base class to not compile.  Looking at the MyFaces and Trinidad
>> codebases, there are indeed a few such tests (although not a gigantic
>> number).  What I propose to do is to make the change in the Shale code, and
>> then fix the test cases in MyFaces and Trinidad and check those in too
>> (since I'm a committer on both repositories).
>>
>> Does anyone see any problem with me doing this (probably over the weekend at
>> some point)?
>>
>> Craig McClanahan
>>
>> [1] https://issues.apache.org/struts/browse/SHALE-249
>>
>>
>



Reply via email to