Concerning the release there might be a difference for incubator projects but I'll have a look at it tomorrow.
As for the logging I don't care that the build logs a lot but it's not that I'm against hiding the logging either Francis On Wed, Jun 17, 2009 at 4:23 PM, Rainer Döbele<[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Francis, > > well I did it myself on my machine and I was just thinking about it. > My personal opinion is, that I don't need log output from tests for every > build - all I need to know is whether any of the tests failed at all. If so, > I can investigate on this specific test. > But it's a personal opinion. > Write the log output to a file sounds like a good idea to me too. > > The next question is: Do we now put it up for voting or not. > Is there anything else we can or must supply. > > Apache CXF has a nice document called "BUILDING.txt" that explains how to > build with Maven. > We could adapt this for our release. > > @Jörg are you still reading this. What's your opinion? > > Regards > Rainer > > Francis De Brabandere wrote: >> Re: logging of unit tests >> >> So I set the level to FATAL and put those parse warnings back to error >> then? Should I convert the log4j settings to xml format? >> >> But if you are not interested in them maybe we can just log to a file >> in the target folder instead of console? >> >> On Wed, Jun 17, 2009 at 10:19 AM, Rainer Döbele<[email protected]> >> wrote: >> > Hi Francis, >> > >> > thanks a lot. >> > Now I can see where the properties for log4j are set. >> > I didn't think about looking in src/test/resources - but its logical. >> > Usually we use an embedded xml configuration instead of a properties >> file. >> > >> > The output is much better, however I would even consider setting the >> debug level to FATAL instead of WARN. >> > The overall result is measured anyway and there is IMO not much >> benefit in having the log output there. >> > What do you think? >> > >> > Regards >> > Rainer >> > >> > >> > Francis De Brabandere wrote: >> >> Re: revive the release process >> >> >> >> Changed those errors to warnings for logging since a default value >> is >> >> provided these are no real exceptions. >> >> Also set the unit test default log level to WARN >> >> >> >> Let me know if this is ok, we could also keep them at error level >> and >> >> not provide the stack trace. I don't know of an option in log4j to >> >> hide the traces >> >> >> >> What do you think? >> >> >> >> On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 5:08 PM, Francis De >> >> Brabandere<[email protected]> wrote: >> >> > Hi Rainer, >> >> > >> >> > I'll have a look at the logging this evening. >> >> > >> >> > On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 5:03 PM, Rainer Döbele<[email protected]> >> >> wrote: >> >> >> Hi Francis (and everyone interested), >> >> >> >> >> >> after it has been very quiet on the dev-mailing list recently, I >> >> would like to revive the release process of empire-db 2.0.5 in order >> to >> >> be able to go ahead with some possibly bigger changes. >> >> >> >> >> >> The current assembly builds well and I as far as I can tell all >> >> required legal documents are there. >> >> >> However, there is one thing that annoys me: >> >> >> The JUnit test-code produces very verbose output - including some >> >> exceptions. >> >> >> Those exceptions are intended and handled properly - but are >> >> confusing. >> >> >> @Francis: is there a way of disabling log output when running the >> >> unit tests? >> >> >> >> >> >> Apart from that the assembly is fine to me. >> >> >> Anyone else to comment the assembly before we put it up for >> voting? >> >> >> >> >> >> Regards >> >> >> Rainer >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > -- >> >> > http://www.somatik.be >> >> > Microsoft gives you windows, Linux gives you the whole house. >> >> > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> -- >> >> http://www.somatik.be >> >> Microsoft gives you windows, Linux gives you the whole house. >> > >> >> >> >> -- >> http://www.somatik.be >> Microsoft gives you windows, Linux gives you the whole house. > -- http://www.somatik.be Microsoft gives you windows, Linux gives you the whole house.
