2011/10/18 <[email protected]>: > Author: felixk > Date: Tue Oct 18 13:52:43 2011 > New Revision: 1185659 > > URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1185659&view=rev > Log: > Both (emma / cobertura) plugins are for measure of codecoverage of tests. > Using only one of the plugins should fullfill the needs. If I've chosen for > any reasons the wrong one please let me know. For now I left cobertura plugin.
AFAIK cobertura is GPL while emma is CPL. As long as we don't bundle them and don't require them to build our products we should be fine with both, but I guess that if in doubt we should better choose emma as CPL is a category B license (http://www.apache.org/legal/3party.html). > Modified: > james/project/trunk/pom.xml > > Modified: james/project/trunk/pom.xml > URL: > http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/james/project/trunk/pom.xml?rev=1185659&r1=1185658&r2=1185659&view=diff > ============================================================================== > --- james/project/trunk/pom.xml (original) > +++ james/project/trunk/pom.xml Tue Oct 18 13:52:43 2011 > @@ -702,11 +702,6 @@ > </plugin> > <plugin> > <groupId>org.codehaus.mojo</groupId> > - <artifactId>emma-maven-plugin</artifactId> > - <version>1.0-alpha-3</version> > - </plugin> > - <plugin> > - <groupId>org.codehaus.mojo</groupId> > <artifactId>exec-maven-plugin</artifactId> > <version>1.2</version> > </plugin> > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
