Hi
I think there are many ways to do it. For example, you can play with
source paths and maven profiles. For example the following code is
valid:
<profiles>
<profile>
<id>tests-jsf-21</id>
<activation>
<property>
<name>jsf</name>
<value>21</value>
</property>
</activation>
<build>
<plugins>
<plugin>
<artifactId>maven-war-plugin</artifactId>
<configuration>
<webResources>
<resource>
<directory>src/main/webapp21</directory>
</resource>
</webResources>
</configuration>
</plugin>
</plugins>
</build>
</profile>
You can include source, resource, or webappp directories based on a profile.
We can do trick about run in for jsf 2.0, create an specific task for
hudson and "playing" with the profiles. Note we don't need to generate
any artifacts or even release them. The only thing we need is run them
periodically.
The problem about have the code in different locations is the same we
had with shared module: to compile one we need compile the other one.
That's other reason why I'm proposing move everything instead keep two
copies.
regards,
Leonardo
2011/7/29 Gerhard Petracek <[email protected]>:
> @jakob: +1
> regards,
> gerhard
>
> http://www.irian.at
>
> Your JSF powerhouse -
> JSF Consulting, Development and
> Courses in English and German
>
> Professional Support for Apache MyFaces
>
>
>
> 2011/7/29 Jakob Korherr <[email protected]>
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I would like to do it exactly like we did it in MyFaces-Test, however
>> not exactly like you're proposing. As you said, MyFaces-Test keeps the
>> most code in the 1.2 module and the 2.0 module just takes what it
>> needs. But what you're proposing is to move all integration-tests to
>> 2.1 and also run it with 2.0 in some kind of way..
>>
>> I would like to have the 2.0 integration-tests really in the 2.0
>> branch. If some of them (or as you pointed out: most of them) also
>> apply to the 2.1 branch, the 2.1 branch should re-use them dynamically
>> and not the other way round.
>>
>> Thus it would be like this: 2.0 branch provides all 2.0 applicable
>> tests, 2.1 branch re-uses the tests which also apply for 2.1 and adds
>> some 2.1 specific ones.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Jakob
>>
>> 2011/7/28 Leonardo Uribe <[email protected]>:
>> > Hi
>> >
>> > Some weeks ago a new module for integration test was added. See.
>> >
>> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MYFACES-3217
>> >
>> > The code proposed was committed on 2.0.x branch. In the following mail
>> > we'll discuss if we should move this to current trunk (2.1.x) or
>> > create and maintain two copies: one in 2.0.x and the other one in
>> > 2.1.x (trunk).
>> >
>> > I agree that both branches are still used a lot and are being
>> > maintained actively. But I think maintain two branches of the same
>> > testing code seems to be an unnecessary burden. I think we can put
>> > this in just one place an make it run with 2.0. / 2.1 with just some
>> > maven configuration.
>> >
>> > Note 2.0.x and 2.1.x are very similar. In practice, every time we
>> > found an issue in 2.1.x, the same patch is applied to 2.0.x too. So it
>> > is not necessary to run the integration tests for 2.0.x branch because
>> > in practice when we run it against 2.1.x, we are taking into account
>> > 2.0.x, as long as the changes be commited on 2.0.x too.
>> >
>> > In few words, put this on trunk does not mean it will not run against
>> > 2.0 !!!!. A "light" way to deal with this kind of problem is take a
>> > look at myfaces tests project. It has two modules: 1.2 and 2.0, and
>> > 2.0 just "take what it needs" from 1.2 module and that's it. This
>> > reduce the burden to the minimum.
>> >
>> > regards,
>> >
>> > Leonardo Uribe
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Jakob Korherr
>>
>> blog: http://www.jakobk.com
>> twitter: http://twitter.com/jakobkorherr
>> work: http://www.irian.at
>
>
