On Thu, 2003-01-09 at 17:30, Brett Porter wrote:
> if you don't apply the patch to maven.xml, then touchstone tests will 
> pass. Then the xdoc stuff can be tested with "maven site".
> The maven.xml patch can be re-applied after the bug is fixed :)
> 
> Alternatively, you could continue to have it fail, and make the "don't 
> run tests" property (can't remember off the top of my head) needed to 
> build HEAD?

I will do the former and then we can try to fix the bug. Thanks again!

> Cheers,
> Brett
> 
> Jason van Zyl wrote:
> > On Thu, 2003-01-09 at 16:30, Brett Porter wrote:
> > 
> >>I don't know if this is the approach you wanted to take, but this 
> >>includes a currently failing test for xdoc.
> >>
> >>maven.xml for touchstone-build, and a tarball of an xdocs directory to 
> >>put under there too.
> > 
> > 
> > Yes, definitely the right approach! Adding to the touchstone is ideal.
> > But we have to figure out how to make the test pass as the touchstone is
> > run after Maven's unit tests so the bootstrap will not go through unless
> > the touchstone is successful.
> > 
> > 
> >>Cheers,
> >>Brett
> >>
> >>______________________________________________________________________
> > 
> > 
> 
> 
> --
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
-- 
jvz.

Jason van Zyl
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://tambora.zenplex.org

In short, man creates for himself a new religion of a rational
and technical order to justify his work and to be justified in it.
  
  -- Jacques Ellul, The Technological Society


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

Reply via email to