Fixed. Not helped by the awesome documentation of hamcrest... Martijn
On Mon, Aug 3, 2015 at 11:37 AM, Martin Grigorov <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi, > > I'm +1 for 2.0 unless it breaks something bad. > AFAIK junit.next will come without hamcrest. > > Martin Grigorov > Freelancer. Available for hire! > Wicket Training and Consulting > https://twitter.com/mtgrigorov > > On Mon, Aug 3, 2015 at 11:50 AM, Martijn Dashorst < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> Do we want to use the new 2.0.0.0 version of hamcrest, or stick with >> the dependency from junit (1.3)? >> >> I ask because we have a dependency convergence error in our poms since >> junit includes 1.3 and our POMs say 2.0.0.0. >> >> I've excluded hamcrest from junit, but then we run into a compilation >> error (in WicketTester), that I can probably fix, but is that what we >> want? >> >> So which way do we want to go? >> >> Martijn >> >> -- >> Become a Wicket expert, learn from the best: http://wicketinaction.com >> -- Become a Wicket expert, learn from the best: http://wicketinaction.com
