Nope, I'm on ubuntu. I've tried it on Windows with the same jdk version.
Everything works fine. I can confirm that both before and after my changes
all tests pass.


2013/6/6 Glyn Normington <[email protected]>

> Windows?
>
> Regards,
> Glyn
>
>
>
> On 6 Jun 2013, at 14:21, Alexander Shutyaev <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Ok, I've tried running tests on the project *without* my modifications.
> I've git-cloned it about an hour ago. Then I've run *mvn clean test
> -Pit,equinox* from the project's root folder.
>
> I'm getting about 190 test error in *core* module. They seem weird. Most
> of them are because a classpath resource that is created is *null* (see
> attached NestedElementTest.xml report). Next there are two tests that fail
> because *System.out* is *null *(see attached DictionaryEditorTest.xml
> report). There may be other types of errors but because the number of
> failures is so high it's hard for me to find if there are any others.
>
> The weirdness of these failures has lead me to believe I was missing
> something in the environment. I've tried switching the jdk (from 1.6.0_43
> to 1.7.0_21) but the errors are the same. Maven version is 3.0.5.
>
> Do you have any clues? Should I maybe post a new thread so the others
> would see it under a more appropriate title (like "tests fail")?
>
>
> 2013/6/6 Glyn Normington <[email protected]>
>
>> Thanks. I think your highest priority should be to get the tests to pass
>> before raising a bug.
>>
>> Unfortunately, I don't have much detailed knowledge of Gemini Blueprint
>> internals. I'm acting as a caretaker project lead until such time as a
>> project lead can be found who has the necessary time and/or existing
>> expertise in the codebase. This means I probably won't be much help
>> debugging failing tests.
>>
>> Your best best would be to do as much analysis as you can and if you are
>> still stuck, post to this list and hope the other committers can help. I'm
>> afraid this might cost you quite some time. I guess another strategy would
>> be to get all the tests passing without your changes and then phase the
>> changes in gradually so you can narrow down very quickly which part of your
>> change is breaking a test. I'd certainly adopt that approach if I was you.
>>
>> Hope that helps!
>>
>>  Regards,
>> Glyn
>>
>>
>> <pivotal-logo-email-signature.png>
>>
>> On 6 Jun 2013, at 10:58, Alexander Shutyaev <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Glyn
>>
>> 1. I've looked at their latest release source code. It seems that they
>> propagate all properties (both private and public) and there is no way to
>> turn it off. I'll write a test to confirm this. So I guess the answer is
>> 'partially yes but rather no' :)
>>
>> 2. The problem is I can't get all the tests pass on the original project
>> :) I've tried to do something about it but then I gave up. While I
>> developed I ran only PropertyPlaceholderTest and my PropertyPropagationTest
>> (they are very much alike in the setup procedures). They both pass.
>> However, I understand that rules are rules so I should ensure that tests
>> pass. I'll try once again to get the original project's tests to pass. And
>> if I succeed I'll run them with my patch applied. However if I don't
>> succeed I may require your help to get the original tests to pass.
>>
>> 3. No new dependencies except from Apache Felix Configuration Admin
>> version upgrade from 1.2.4 to 1.2.8.
>>
>> 4. I'll start working with the docs.
>>
>> 5. As for raising a bug - should I do it already? A new one or is there
>> an existing one?
>>
>>
>> 2013/6/6 Glyn Normington <[email protected]>
>>
>>> Hi Alexander
>>>
>>> Thanks for raising this contribution. Some questions:
>>>
>>> 1. Does Apache Aries Blueprint support this function?
>>>
>>> 2. Does the build pass, including all tests, with your patch applied?
>>>
>>> 3. What new build or runtime dependencies does this patch require, if
>>> any, in addition to upgrading Felix config admin?
>>>
>>> I welcome comments from the other Gemini Blueprint committers, but the
>>> next step should be to raise a bug and attach the code. We'll need to do IP
>>> due diligence and  obtain a documentation patch before we can commit the
>>> code. One of us can easily review your English, which looks good so far!
>>>
>>>  Regards,
>>> Glyn
>>>
>>>
>>> <pivotal-logo-email-signature.png>
>>>
>>> On 6 Jun 2013, at 09:39, Alexander Shutyaev <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi all!
>>>
>>> Recently I've developed an enhancement for Gemini Blueprint and I want
>>> to contribute it. The description is below, the patch is attached (must be
>>> applied to project's root dir). Any suggestions are welcome! If this
>>> contribution is accepted (which I very much hope will happen :) I'm ready
>>> to make changes to the documentation (although English is not my native so
>>> maybe a final revision from a native speaker would be nice :)
>>>
>>> Property propagation
>>>
>>> This contribution is inspired by the Section 104.4.4 "Property
>>> Propagation" of the OSGi Configuration Admin specification. First, let me
>>> quote it.
>>>
>>> =====
>>> A configuration target should copy the public configuration properties
>>> (properties whose name does not start with a ’.’ or \u002E) of the
>>> Dictionary object argument in updated(Dictionary) into the service
>>> properties on any resulting service registration.
>>>
>>> This propagation allows the development of applications that leverage
>>> the Framework service registry more extensively, so compliance with this
>>> mechanism is advised.
>>>
>>> A configuration target may ignore any configuration properties it does
>>> not recognize, or it may change the values of the configuration properties
>>> before these properties are registered as service properties. Configuration
>>> properties in the Framework service registry are not strictly related to
>>> the configuration information.
>>>
>>> Bundles that follow this recommendation to propagate public
>>> configuration properties can participate in horizontal applications. For
>>> example, an application that maintains physical location information in the
>>> Framework service registry could find out where a particular device is
>>> located in the house or car. This service could use a property dedicated to
>>> the physical location and provide functions that leverage this property,
>>> such as a graphic user interface that displays these locations.
>>>
>>> Bundles performing service registrations on behalf of other bundles
>>> (e.g. OSGi Declarative Services) should propagate all public configuration
>>> properties and not propagate private configuration properties.
>>> =====
>>>
>>> At present Eclipse Gemini Blueprint does not provide such functionality.
>>> The goal of this contribution is to add support of it.
>>>
>>> Now, to the implementation details. *managed-service-factory* element
>>> now has a new property - *propagate-properties* (boolean,
>>> default=false). If it's set to true then the following changes apply:
>>>
>>> - during the initial instance creation all public properties (those
>>> whose name does not start with '.') are propagated as service properties of
>>> the resulting service registration.
>>>
>>> - during the initial injection both public and private properties are
>>> injected into the instance bean; the private properties get their first dot
>>> removed before injection; in case there is a name conflict between private
>>> and public property during injection, private property takes precedence
>>>
>>> - if *autowire-on-update* is set to true then the subsequent injections
>>> are done in the same manner and service properties are also updated.
>>>
>>> More specific implementation details can be seen in the code itself.
>>> There is also a new integration test - PropertyPropagationTest that covers
>>> the described functionality.
>>>
>>> P.S. Apache Felix Configuration Admin implementation used in tests had
>>> to be updated from v1.2.4 to v1.2.8 because v1.2.4 for some reason
>>> prohibits configuration properties that start with dot.
>>>
>>> Best regards,
>>> Alexander
>>> <property-propagation.patch>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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
>>>
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
>>
>>
> <TEST-org.eclipse.gemini.blueprint.blueprint.config.NestedElementsTest.xml>
> <TEST-org.eclipse.gemini.blueprint.DictionaryEditorTest.xml>
> _______________________________________________
>
> 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
>
>

<<pivotal-logo-email-signature.png>>

_______________________________________________
gemini-dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/gemini-dev

Reply via email to