Yes, I was just being dim and looking at the wrong view of the source tree.
They are under src/test which is fine, and maven will run them. Its not like
they are under src/main and incorrectly being included in the main build
artifact.

On 11/10/2007, Martin Ritchie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On 11/10/2007, Arnaud Simon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Thu, 2007-10-11 at 15:20 +0100, Rupert Smith wrote:
> > > Arnaud, which are the four tests? I had a look in
> org.apache.qpid.client but
> > > I couldn't see any tests there.
> >
> > AMQQueueDeferredOrderingTest
> > DispatcherTest
> > MessageListenerMultiConsumerImmediatePrefetch
> > MessageListenerMultiConsumerTest
> > MessageListenerTest
> > ResetMessageListenerTest
> >
> > This is more than 4 actually.
> >
> >
> > > On 11/10/2007, Martin Ritchie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Can we please wait till M2 has been merged back to trunk. If the
> files
> > > > are moved then merging becomes a copy and trunk changes may be lost.
> > > >
> > > > On 11/10/2007, Arnaud Simon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > > Hello,
> > > > >
> > > > > There are four Junit tests in the package: org.apache.qpid.client
> > > > > I don't think those tests should be there especially if we want
> them to
> > > > > be run as part of the build. I would suggest we move them for now
> into
> > > > > the package: org.apache.qpid.test.unit.client
>
> They are not all specifically unit tests as some still use an InVM
> broker. Their package location shouldn't make any difference as they
> should be in the test directory and maven will pick all classes ending
> Test (or having Test at the start IIRC) in the name.
>
> > > > > Is it ok? or should we wait until the M2 merge is done? Note that
> we may
> > > > > want to move them into another module as part of the test
> restructuring
> > > > > effort (but this is another story).
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks for letting me know
> > > > >
> > > > > Arnaud
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Martin Ritchie
> > > >
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> Martin Ritchie
>

Reply via email to