I’m not particularly against that- that be fine - a little reminder to run ‘ant externals’ to get full test coverage. But it still has to say zero failures after the run (albeit having run fewer tests than with externals). Otherwise it scares people.
/M On 07 Sep 2014, at 10:59, Attila Szegedi <[email protected]> wrote: > I actually appreciated that I had a signal that some tests were not run. If I > do a fresh checkout and not run "ant externals", now I won't get a signal > that some tests weren't run, and maybe I'll mistakenly think everything > passed. How about at least an <echo> in build.xml that'll print a warning > after a successful test run that some tests were skipped as externals aren't > available? > > Attila. > > On Sep 7, 2014, at 7:04 AM, Marcus Lagergren <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> Why did you remove some of the test runs? Just redundancy? >> >> Otherwise, looks fine form me. +1 >> >> In the future I think it could be nice to have a proxy check before ant >> externals, which certainly helps me when I am behind a firewall. >> >> /M >> >> On 07 Sep 2014, at 06:40, A. Sundararajan >> <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Please review http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sundar/8057742/ >>> >>> Tested that w/without the test/script/external directory, "ant clean test" >>> is fine. >>> >>> Thanks >>> -Sundar >> >
