[GitHub] ant pull request #69: Allow more control over location of JUnit libraries fo...

2018-10-29 Thread jaikiran
Github user jaikiran closed the pull request at:

https://github.com/apache/ant/pull/69


---

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@ant.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@ant.apache.org



[GitHub] ant issue #69: Allow more control over location of JUnit libraries for users...

2018-10-29 Thread jaikiran
Github user jaikiran commented on the issue:

https://github.com/apache/ant/pull/69
  
Thanks Stefan. I'll go ahead and merge this today and include a note in 
WHATSNEW.


---

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@ant.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@ant.apache.org



Re: ant git commit: Add magic names for tests, run more tests in Surefire

2018-10-29 Thread Stefan Bodewig
On 2018-10-28, Gintautas Grigelionis wrote:

> Even if running unit tests with different tools is a no-goal for you, it's
> a good check of robustness --

ACK

> I'm afraid we're cheating a little anyway by compiling testutil with core
> tests first, and then building a separate jar file.

This is only if you are willing to accept to the dependency model of
Maven :-)

To me there is no cheating. In my model we have Ant's core code. We have
Ant Testutil which contains helpers and we have the tests for Ant's core
which depend on both core and testutil.

There is no cycle: core <- testutil <- tests of core

It is just Maven's model that doesn't allow you to introduce test scope
dependencies that depend on your code under test. A model I disagree
with.

So in the maven POMs we might be cheating Maven, but only because we
have to circumvent Maven's model which doesn't fit ours.

Stefan

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@ant.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@ant.apache.org



Re: ant git commit: Add magic names for tests, run more tests in Surefire

2018-10-29 Thread Stefan Bodewig
On 2018-10-29, Gintautas Grigelionis wrote:

>> Thanks, I'll merge it to master, then.

> I've notice in Nightly that Ant treats MagicTestNames as a test, too.

Uhm, it shouldn't.

> Would it make sense to add a test method, checking for documented
> properties?

Adding a test that asserts the constants defined in the interface are
defined? Sounds a bit backwards to me.

For now I'll just ensure the tests aren't run.

Thanks for the heads-up

   Stefan

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@ant.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@ant.apache.org



Re: ant git commit: Add magic names for tests, run more tests in Surefire

2018-10-29 Thread Gintautas Grigelionis
> Thanks, I'll merge it to master, then.
>

I've notice in Nightly that Ant treats MagicTestNames as a test, too.
Would it make sense to add a test method, checking for documented
properties?

Gintas