[piccolo2d-dev] Re: Any objections to me adding Cobertura coverage report to the Maven Build?

2009-07-16 Thread Marcus Rohrmoser

now it's me who can't follow. Cobertura? You don't mean such a thing: 
http://files.getdropbox.com/u/965005/piccolo2d.java/site-stage/piccolo2d-core/cobertura/index.html
 
  - do You? That's part of the mvn build ever since.

M



--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
Piccolo2D Developers Group: http://groups.google.com/group/piccolo2d-dev?hl=en
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---



[piccolo2d-dev] Re: Any objections to me adding Cobertura coverage report to the Maven Build?

2009-07-16 Thread allain

I do mean such a thing. I'm not used to having the parent's pom file
split into a subdirecty.  My bad.  Thanks.

On Jul 16, 5:54 am, Marcus Rohrmoser mr0...@mro.name wrote:
 now it's me who can't follow. Cobertura? You don't mean such a 
 thing:http://files.getdropbox.com/u/965005/piccolo2d.java/site-stage/piccol...
   - do You? That's part of the mvn build ever since.

         M
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
Piccolo2D Developers Group: http://groups.google.com/group/piccolo2d-dev?hl=en
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---



[piccolo2d-dev] Re: Any objections to me adding Cobertura coverage report to the Maven Build?

2009-07-16 Thread Marcus Rohrmoser


Am 16.07.2009 um 13:41 schrieb allain:

 I do mean such a thing. I'm not used to having the parent's pom file
 split into a subdirecty.  My bad.  Thanks.

BTW: I really like the growing green in there. You're a gifted  
gardener ;-)



--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
Piccolo2D Developers Group: http://groups.google.com/group/piccolo2d-dev?hl=en
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---



[piccolo2d-dev] Re: Any objections to me adding Cobertura coverage report to the Maven Build?

2009-07-15 Thread Michael Heuer

allain wrote:

 My reasons for wanting to do this are:
 - Obviously Code Coverage Metrics are good but this one is IDE
 agnostic.
 - It has a Hudson plugin that can be installed allowing us to diagram
 the (hopefully) increasing progression of code coverage over time in a
 nice convenient graph.

 http://wiki.hudson-ci.org//display/HUDSON/Cobertura+Plugin

The javascript code used in the Cobertura reports themselves are
licensed under the GPL, and there was concern in e.g. the Apache
Commons community that distributing those reports violates the terms
of the license.  You may find some discussion threads in archives of
the commons-dev mailing list.  I can't recall what the resolution of
the issue was though.

   michael

--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
Piccolo2D Developers Group: http://groups.google.com/group/piccolo2d-dev?hl=en
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---



[piccolo2d-dev] Re: Any objections to me adding Cobertura coverage report to the Maven Build?

2009-07-15 Thread Samuel Robert Reid





GPL itself says output from a GPL program is not covered:
http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#GPLOutput

Sam Reid

Michael Heuer wrote:

  allain wrote:

  
  
My reasons for wanting to do this are:
- Obviously Code Coverage Metrics are good but this one is IDE
agnostic.
- It has a Hudson plugin that can be installed allowing us to diagram
the (hopefully) increasing progression of code coverage over time in a
nice convenient graph.

http://wiki.hudson-ci.org//display/HUDSON/Cobertura+Plugin

  
  
The _javascript_ code used in the Cobertura reports themselves are
licensed under the GPL, and there was concern in e.g. the Apache
Commons community that distributing those reports violates the terms
of the license.  You may find some discussion threads in archives of
the commons-dev mailing list.  I can't recall what the resolution of
the issue was though.

   michael


  


--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
Piccolo2D Developers Group: http://groups.google.com/group/piccolo2d-dev?hl=en
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---