Hi Glyn The main reason I'd prefer JaCoCo is that it is completely open source, hosted on github and published under EPL 1.0 (https://github.com/jacoco/jacoco/blob/master/LICENSE.md), thus I believe it is a better fit for this project.
Regards, Olaf -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of [email protected] Sent: Donnerstag, 9. Mai 2013 14:27 To: [email protected] Subject: gemini-dev Digest, Vol 39, Issue 2 Send gemini-dev mailing list submissions to [email protected] To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/gemini-dev or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to [email protected] You can reach the person managing the list at [email protected] When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of gemini-dev digest..." Today's Topics: 1. Gemini Naming 1.0.2.RELEASE is now available (Violeta Georgieva) 2. Re: gemini-dev Digest, Vol 39, Issue 1 (Olaf Otto) 3. Re: gemini-dev Digest, Vol 39, Issue 1 (Glyn Normington) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Thu, 9 May 2013 09:31:10 +0300 From: Violeta Georgieva <[email protected]> To: Gemini and sub-projects developer discussions <[email protected]> Subject: [gemini-dev] Gemini Naming 1.0.2.RELEASE is now available Message-ID: <cafmzftukjtynohcgs3-f5cgpmbmesj6gqyclefxft48hldx...@mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Hi, Gemini Naming has shipped its 1.0.2.RELEASE. The artifacts are available for download [1]. This release contains fix for BZ407399 [2]. The official documentation can be found here [3]. Regards Violeta [1] http://eclipse.org/gemini/naming/download.php [2] https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=407399 [3] http://eclipse.org/gemini/naming/documentation.php -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/private/gemini-dev/attachments/20130509/61f d27d1/attachment.html> ------------------------------ Message: 2 Date: Thu, 9 May 2013 13:57:38 +0200 From: "Olaf Otto" <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [gemini-dev] gemini-dev Digest, Vol 39, Issue 1 Message-ID: <[email protected]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Hi Glyn I am about half way through all the testcases of the gemini core. I will make the first commit once I am through with all of them to avoid inhomogeneous testing state in a branch actively under development. However, I just committed the POM with the new dependencies - I am quite sure these shall suffice for the refactorings. Regarding test coverage: I found that an old version of clover was once used to measure code coverage. It is my intention to compare both coverage and execution time of the tests with the initial test coverage figures to prevent a drop of test coverage - how about switching to JaCoCo (http://www.eclemma.org/jacoco/)? The alternative could be to request an open source license for clover from Atlassian, but I'd prefer the former solution. Regards, Olaf -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of [email protected] Sent: Dienstag, 7. Mai 2013 18:00 To: [email protected] Subject: gemini-dev Digest, Vol 39, Issue 1 Send gemini-dev mailing list submissions to [email protected] To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/gemini-dev or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to [email protected] You can reach the person managing the list at [email protected] When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of gemini-dev digest..." Today's Topics: 1. Re: Gemini Blueprint 2.0.0 schedule (Glyn Normington) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Tue, 7 May 2013 10:18:16 +0100 From: Glyn Normington <[email protected]> To: Gemini and sub-projects developer discussions <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [gemini-dev] Gemini Blueprint 2.0.0 schedule Message-ID: <[email protected]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Hi Olaf Any progress on this? The end of May isn't as far off as it was... Regards, Glyn On 4 Apr 2013, at 21:41, Olaf Otto <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi all, > > First of all, I'd like to say I'm happy to be on board soon. The gemini-blueprint project is one of the most valuable open source additions to the projects I'm involved with and I am looking forward to (hopefully) help advancing it. > > Regarding the test improvements: End of May 2013 seems feasible. > Adding new dependencies for testing is likely to be the first thing I'll do, thus getting the CQs done timely should not be an issue. Presumably, those dependencies are exclusively required for testing (i.e. "works-with" [1]). > > I will soon proceed by posting an example of the test conventions and > code style I'd like to use to see if everyone agrees. > > Regards, > Olaf > > [1] > http://wiki.eclipse.org/Development_Resources/IP/Test_and_Build_Depend > encies > > On 04/04/2013 06:00 PM, [email protected] wrote: >> Date: Thu, 4 Apr 2013 13:34:10 +0100 >> From: Glyn Normington <[email protected]> >> To: "[email protected] developer discussions" >> <[email protected]> >> Subject: [gemini-dev] Gemini Blueprint 2.0.0 schedule >> Message-ID: <[email protected]> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" >> >> I'm currently aiming for the end of June for Gemini Blueprint 2.0.0 >> ([1]) so that it is available to replace 2.0.0.M01 in the Virgo 3.7.0 line which is also currently planned to ship in June. >> >> Olaf Otto, who should become a GB committer within about a week, is proposing some improvements to testing which may involve additional dependencies and therefore CQs. I'd like to understand whether the improvements can be made by, say, the end of May 2013 so that I can include them in the 2.0 release. If not, I may go ahead and prepare the 2.0.0 docuware now and we can add the new test stuff in 2.1.0. >> >> Olaf: would you care to comment please? >> >> Regards, >> Glyn >> [1] http://projects.eclipse.org/projects/rt.gemini.blueprint >> >> -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was >> scrubbed... >> URL: >> <https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/private/gemini-dev/attachments/20130 >> 404/02306ba1/attachment.html> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> _______________________________________________ >> gemini-dev mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/gemini-dev > > _______________________________________________ > gemini-dev mailing list > [email protected] > https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/gemini-dev -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/private/gemini-dev/attachments/20130507/60b 4c4a1/attachment.html> ------------------------------ _______________________________________________ gemini-dev mailing list [email protected] https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/gemini-dev End of gemini-dev Digest, Vol 39, Issue 1 ***************************************** ------------------------------ Message: 3 Date: Thu, 9 May 2013 13:25:52 +0100 From: Glyn Normington <[email protected]> To: Gemini and sub-projects developer discussions <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [gemini-dev] gemini-dev Digest, Vol 39, Issue 1 Message-ID: <[email protected]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Thanks Olaf. Why do you prefer JaCoCo? I'm not averse to using it, but I'd like to understand. Some background about how Clover could be used on Hudson: https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=331221 Regards, Glyn On 9 May 2013, at 12:57, Olaf Otto <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Glyn > > I am about half way through all the testcases of the gemini core. I > will make the first commit once I am through with all of them to avoid > inhomogeneous testing state in a branch actively under development. > However, I just committed the POM with the new dependencies - I am > quite sure these shall suffice for the refactorings. Regarding test > coverage: I found that an old version of clover was once used to > measure code coverage. It is my intention to compare both coverage and > execution time of the tests with the initial test coverage figures to > prevent a drop of test coverage - how about switching to JaCoCo > (http://www.eclemma.org/jacoco/)? The alternative could be to request > an open source license for clover from Atlassian, but I'd prefer the former solution. > > Regards, > Olaf > > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] > [mailto:[email protected]] > On Behalf Of [email protected] > Sent: Dienstag, 7. Mai 2013 18:00 > To: [email protected] > Subject: gemini-dev Digest, Vol 39, Issue 1 > > Send gemini-dev mailing list submissions to > [email protected] > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/gemini-dev > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > [email protected] > > You can reach the person managing the list at > [email protected] > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > than > "Re: Contents of gemini-dev digest..." > > > Today's Topics: > > 1. Re: Gemini Blueprint 2.0.0 schedule (Glyn Normington) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Tue, 7 May 2013 10:18:16 +0100 > From: Glyn Normington <[email protected]> > To: Gemini and sub-projects developer discussions > <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [gemini-dev] Gemini Blueprint 2.0.0 schedule > Message-ID: <[email protected]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" > > Hi Olaf > > Any progress on this? The end of May isn't as far off as it was... > > Regards, > Glyn > > > On 4 Apr 2013, at 21:41, Olaf Otto <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Hi all, >> >> First of all, I'd like to say I'm happy to be on board soon. The > gemini-blueprint project is one of the most valuable open source > additions to the projects I'm involved with and I am looking forward > to (hopefully) help advancing it. >> >> Regarding the test improvements: End of May 2013 seems feasible. >> Adding > new dependencies for testing is likely to be the first thing I'll do, > thus getting the CQs done timely should not be an issue. Presumably, > those dependencies are exclusively required for testing (i.e. "works-with" [1]). >> >> I will soon proceed by posting an example of the test conventions and >> code > style I'd like to use to see if everyone agrees. >> >> Regards, >> Olaf >> >> [1] >> http://wiki.eclipse.org/Development_Resources/IP/Test_and_Build_Depen >> d >> encies >> >> On 04/04/2013 06:00 PM, [email protected] wrote: >>> Date: Thu, 4 Apr 2013 13:34:10 +0100 >>> From: Glyn Normington <[email protected]> >>> To: "[email protected] developer discussions" >>> <[email protected]> >>> Subject: [gemini-dev] Gemini Blueprint 2.0.0 schedule >>> Message-ID: <[email protected]> >>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" >>> >>> I'm currently aiming for the end of June for Gemini Blueprint 2.0.0 >>> ([1]) > so that it is available to replace 2.0.0.M01 in the Virgo 3.7.0 line > which is also currently planned to ship in June. >>> >>> Olaf Otto, who should become a GB committer within about a week, is > proposing some improvements to testing which may involve additional > dependencies and therefore CQs. I'd like to understand whether the > improvements can be made by, say, the end of May 2013 so that I can > include them in the 2.0 release. If not, I may go ahead and prepare > the 2.0.0 docuware now and we can add the new test stuff in 2.1.0. >>> >>> Olaf: would you care to comment please? >>> >>> Regards, >>> Glyn >>> [1] http://projects.eclipse.org/projects/rt.gemini.blueprint >>> >>> -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was >>> scrubbed... >>> URL: >>> <https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/private/gemini-dev/attachments/2013 >>> 0 >>> 404/02306ba1/attachment.html> >>> >>> ------------------------------ >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> gemini-dev mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/gemini-dev >> >> _______________________________________________ >> gemini-dev mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/gemini-dev > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was > scrubbed... > URL: > <https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/private/gemini-dev/attachments/201305 > 07/60b > 4c4a1/attachment.html> > > ------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > gemini-dev mailing list > [email protected] > https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/gemini-dev > > > End of gemini-dev Digest, Vol 39, Issue 1 > ***************************************** > > _______________________________________________ > gemini-dev mailing list > [email protected] > https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/gemini-dev -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/private/gemini-dev/attachments/20130509/d4b 2ba80/attachment.html> -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: pivotal-logo-email-signature.png Type: image/png Size: 7498 bytes Desc: not available URL: <https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/private/gemini-dev/attachments/20130509/d4b 2ba80/attachment.png> ------------------------------ _______________________________________________ gemini-dev mailing list [email protected] https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/gemini-dev End of gemini-dev Digest, Vol 39, Issue 2 ***************************************** _______________________________________________ gemini-dev mailing list [email protected] https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/gemini-dev
