Raymond,
Thanks for pointing me at the clarifications.
However, the clarifications don't get us around the problems. I'm not convinced that we should be
moving the tests into the itest bucket, since that will lead to less frequent testing of individual
modules.
At the moment, the tool does not seem to deal correctly with some of the explicit dependencies in
the POM files when those dependencies relate to test runtime dependencies - and this is a common
thing where a test uses a .composite file as part of its work - since then when the testcase runs
all the extensions that are necessary to process the composite file must be present to run the
testcase. I have had to add things back in by hand for the Web services stuff.
Yours, Mike.
Hi,
Please see my clarification on the following thread:
http://markmail.org/message/66wfto6z4ryfmx2r
Thanks,
Raymond
--------------------------------------------------
From: "Mike Edwards" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, December 08, 2008 2:54 PM
To: <[email protected]>
Subject: [2.0] Problems with the Eclipse Maven plugin?
Folks,
When running mvn -Peclipse on the 2.0 code, I am noticing that the
Eclipse project files generated by the plugin seem to have some problems.
Basically, I find that the project files have runtime dependencies
missing so that tests either fail entirely or report non-fatal warnings.
The problem area seems to relate to dependencies that are runtime
dependencies of the testcases (principally) - say, for example, that a
testcase uses a composite file that requires handling of
<interface.wsdl/> elements which requires the interface-wsdl-xml
module present at test runtime. It seems as if the plugin does not
handle such things correctly. If the dependency is not marked with a
<scope/> in the POM, it is ignored entirely. If it is marked
<scope>test</scope> in the POM, then it has been my experience to get
duplicate entries in the Eclipse dependencies, which have required
manual exclusions in the POM to deal with.
Is this a bug in the Eclipse plugin or is it meant to work like this?
Yours, Mike.
