SUREFIRE-1136 finally integrated, thx for the support.
Regards,
NW
On Sat, Jan 31, 2015 at 10:37 AM, Norbert Wnuk
wrote:
> Hi Tibor & Andreas,
> Surefire855, it was only a remark - I was not touching it.
> New pull request attached -
> https://github.com/apache/maven-surefire/pull/84
>
> Regard
Hi Tibor & Andreas,
Surefire855, it was only a remark - I was not touching it.
New pull request attached - https://github.com/apache/maven-surefire/pull/84
Regards,
NW
On Fri, Jan 30, 2015 at 6:16 PM, Tibor Digana
wrote:
> Hi Norbert,
>
> Definitely we should make notes about Maven 2 limitation
Hi Norbert,
Definitely we should make notes about Maven 2 limitations.
After you have opened new PR in GitHub we would add a text in our docu.
I had a reason to use easytesting in Surefire855 IT - it's only IT, the main
code is not affected, just upgrade to JDK6. I can skip this test in JDK5, do
Seems that entire surefire.forkNumber feature does not work on MVN 2.2.1
since for working directory expansion variables that are not yet defined
during initial plug-in execution are set to 'null' value. Later on both
baseDir and current working directory will be invalid, other parts of the
plug-in
Yes, will do that shortly. I would like to aggregate fixes for unit and
integration test in one pull request, the link was only to show the
progress.
NW
On Wed, Jan 28, 2015 at 8:51 AM, Andreas Gudian
wrote:
> Thanks, Norbert!
>
> Could you also create a new Pull-Request for it? Then I can fetc
Thanks, Norbert!
Could you also create a new Pull-Request for it? Then I can fetch it more
easily :-)
Am Mittwoch, 28. Januar 2015 schrieb Norbert Wnuk :
> Link after pushing amended commit -
>
> https://github.com/norbertwnuk/maven-surefire/commit/d6a8af593fc03e12ecf2dc8047669472f7ca263b
>
> O
Link after pushing amended commit -
https://github.com/norbertwnuk/maven-surefire/commit/d6a8af593fc03e12ecf2dc8047669472f7ca263b
On Wed, Jan 28, 2015 at 3:10 AM, Norbert Wnuk wrote:
> Hi Tibor / Andreas,
> I found a time to address problem with unit test, will take a look at
> integration test
Hi Tibor / Andreas,
I found a time to address problem with unit test, will take a look at
integration test tomorrow.
https://github.com/norbertwnuk/maven-surefire/commit/44b6ffaddc93c34c3e76abd4ea5fd3b8d837a130
NW
On Sun, Jan 25, 2015 at 1:32 AM, Tibor Digana
wrote:
> Hi Norbert,
> I have updaa
Hi Norbert,
I have updaated PR #82 with comment on GitHub.
The Ubuntu builds fail.
I would prefer keeping the test anyway.
Try to find a solution for Ubuntu as well; otherwise use JUnit assumption
statement
assumeThat( os, anyOf( is( "Windows" ), is( "Ubuntu1" ) ) )
in the particular IT method, p
Hi Norbert,
yesterday I ran the whole build locally (Windows) with JDK 5 and everything
worked for me.
For the linux case, I guess it's hard to create an directory with an
invalid name. In case you don't find an alternative approach, I wouldn't be
devastated if we just removed that test case agai
Hi Andreas,
My pull request seems to be unusually problematic ... I was running all
tests on Ubuntu (and Windows too) but apparently assumption that '\0'
cannot be used in directory name on Linux might not be always true:
https://builds.apache.org/job/maven-surefire/1386/
https://builds.apache.org/
Pull request with the fix - https://github.com/apache/maven-surefire/pull/82
NW
On Wed, Jan 21, 2015 at 9:27 PM, Tibor Digana
wrote:
> This is a traditional problem with animal-sniffer-maven-plugin.
> We had the same issue in JUnit project. Alrerady reported in JIRA
> http://jira.codehaus.org/b
This is a traditional problem with animal-sniffer-maven-plugin.
We had the same issue in JUnit project. Alrerady reported in JIRA
http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MANIMALSNIFFER-54
http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MANIMALSNIFFER-40
I would like to have the check-test goal or a new parameter.
It's sti
Hi Norbert,
Oh, I misses that one as well - our animal sniffer seems to put its nose
only into the main classes.
A new pull-request would be great.
Am Dienstag, 20. Januar 2015 schrieb Norbert Wnuk :
> Hi Andreas,
> The JDK API level is not enforced during build so that my accidental usage
> of
Hi Andreas,
The JDK API level is not enforced during build so that my accidental usage
of JDK 1.7 API in tests was not discovered till recent Jenkins build:
https://builds.apache.org/job/maven-surefire/1385/ Should I create new pull
request / what is the procedure after closing original pull reques
JIRA created, pull request with more mature fix attached (including
integration test).
https://jira.codehaus.org/browse/SUREFIRE-1136
https://github.com/apache/maven-surefire/pull/80
Regards,
NW
On Mon, Jan 19, 2015 at 8:03 AM, Karl Heinz Marbaise
wrote:
> Hi Norbert,
>
> It's great that you a
Hi Norbert,
It's great that you asking for permission to create a jira but you don't
need to just create one and describe the situation etc. why and how it
went wrong or what can be improved and of course your patch is really
great...but it would be much easier if you could either provide a te
Hi Norbert,
sounds great! To create a Jira-Issue for surefire [1], you just need to
sign-up on xircles [2].
You can attach your path to the Jira issue, if you like. The most fluent
way to suggest patches is by making a pull-request on GitHub where we can
directly discuss the patch.
In the end, f
18 matches
Mail list logo
