On Nov 10, 2006, at 3:28 AM, Marnie McCormack wrote:
As you all know we're currently getting organised for M1.
Yep, and I've been working to make maven ready for it. Brian asked
the question about moving to maven for M1 in another thread last
night, and I'm surprised to see no answers to it this morning.
At things stand
there are several open JIRAs for this work. Most of the changes you
are
seeing are directly related to the legal/license requirements for
releasing,
with some others being derived from these changes.
This isn't accurate. I don't think the reorganization of tests that
occurred earlier this week was necessary for legal/license requirements.
All I'm saying in my email below is that 1) it would have been nice
to have gotten advance notice that the tests were going to be
reorganized, so that I wouldn't have wasted time moving the old stuff
around on my branch, and 2) the only thing keeping maven from being
ready for M1 is the need for further improvement to the test structure.
Martin, Rajith & I have been doing the work for the release, but
everyone is
most welcome (indeed encouraged) to contribute to the leg work on
this front
- via the JIRAs (and any new ones you think we need). We're hoping to
complete the restructuring required for release later today. It's not
exciting, but we're getting there.
And as I've noted several times, if anyone wants to pitch in and help
on the maven front, that would be great as well.
For unrelated changes to the tests that you think a good idea -
probably
best to raise JIRAs with details and progress them after M1 is
complete to
minimise flux.
These aren't unrelated test changes -- they're required for maven to
work.
Plenty to be done :-)
Indeed, but let's not make a flurry of immediate changes in the name
of M1 based on assumptions that may or may not be accurate. You seem
to be assuming that maven is not in the M1 picture, while a number of
the rest of us are not making that assumption, as indicated by
Brian's other email thread.
--steve
Marnie
On 11/10/06, Steve Vinoski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Nov 9, 2006, at 10:04 AM, Martin Ritchie wrote:
> - Reorganised unit tests to test.unit
> + This allows ant build system to show what is being built and
> allow easier detection of failure
BTW, despite the reorganization of the unit tests earlier this week,
the client tests still suffer a fundamental flaw: they depend on test
classes under the broker directory. In general, unit tests, for
purposes of isolation, should have as few dependencies as possible,
so this arrangement is less than ideal. It's also specifically bad
from a maven POV because by default maven builds each subproject's
unit tests separately. Such isolation enforcement via standardized
project directory structure is another nice feature of maven.
The client org.apache.qpid.test.unit.ack.DisconnectAndRedeliverTest
class appears to be a big offender in this regard, for example. This
is one of the issues that's been giving me fits on the maven branch.
Over there, I've been trying to move tests that aren't really unit
tests out of the subproject test subdirectories and into a new top-
level subproject under qpid/java called systests. The unannounced
test reorganizations this week have not helped the maven work,
because it means I have to pick up the new structure from the trunk
and get it over on the branch, determine yet again which tests are
actual unit tests and which aren't, and try again to move everything
to where it needs to be. Please don't do any more moves in the trunk
like that for now. Rather, if you'd like to help move things around,
let's do so on the maven branch, as this issue is really the only
blocker remaining to having maven working.
thanks,
--steve
