You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@maven.apache.org by Michael Osipov <mi...@apache.org> on 2018/05/05 22:54:38 UTC
Second MNG-6403
Hi folks,
who seconds MNG-6403 for 3.5.4? A simple fix where we forgot to escape a
period in a regex pattern.
Michael
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
Re: Second MNG-6403
Posted by Robert Scholte <rf...@apache.org>.
On Tue, 08 May 2018 00:23:22 +0200, Michael Osipov <mi...@apache.org>
wrote:
> Am 2018-05-07 um 23:35 schrieb Robert Scholte:
>> On Sun, 06 May 2018 21:32:18 +0200, Karl Heinz Marbaise
>> <kh...@gmx.de> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Michael,
>>>
>>> two things are coming into my mind:
>>>
>>> I stumbled over one thing which is:
>>>
>>> Why do we have the tests in maven-compat and not in maven-artifact ?
>>> Shouldn't they be in maven-artifact instead of maven-compat ?
>> +1
>
> Done is subsequent commmit:
> https://github.com/apache/maven/commit/9021d66e53f979b0664677b7977c650e71d51d1d
>
> Unit tests pass, as well as ITs.
>
> Are we good to merge to master?
>
I would say yes.
>
>>>
>>> Furthermore if I recap the code and the tests I would think we should
>>> add a test that proves that the given pattern is NOT a SNAPSHOT
>>> version...
>>>
>>> Something like this:
>>>
>>> assertEquals( false, ArtifactUtils.isSnapshot(
>>> "1.2.3-20090413X094722-2"));
>>>
>>> WDYT ?
>>>
>>> Kind regards
>>> Karl Heinz Marbaise
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 06/05/18 21:15, Michael Osipov wrote:
>>>> Am 2018-05-06 um 21:08 schrieb Karl Heinz Marbaise:
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>> I second MNG-6403 for 3.5.4 we should write a test for this to be
>>>>> sure this does not happen again...
>>>> Do you have anything specific in mind?
>>>> I have updated the branch and added a test to ArtifactUtilsTest. Is
>>>> that sufficient?
>>>> Michael
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
>>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
Re: Second MNG-6403
Posted by Karl Heinz Marbaise <kh...@gmx.de>.
Hi Michael,
On 08/05/18 00:23, Michael Osipov wrote:
> Am 2018-05-07 um 23:35 schrieb Robert Scholte:
>> On Sun, 06 May 2018 21:32:18 +0200, Karl Heinz Marbaise
>> <kh...@gmx.de> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Michael,
>>>
>>> two things are coming into my mind:
>>>
>>> I stumbled over one thing which is:
>>>
>>> Why do we have the tests in maven-compat and not in maven-artifact ?
>>> Shouldn't they be in maven-artifact instead of maven-compat ?
>>
>> +1
>
> Done is subsequent commmit:
> https://github.com/apache/maven/commit/9021d66e53f979b0664677b7977c650e71d51d1d
>
>
> Unit tests pass, as well as ITs.
>
> Are we good to merge to master?
Yes. +1 from me...
Kind regards
Karl Heinz Marbaise
>
>
>>>
>>> Furthermore if I recap the code and the tests I would think we should
>>> add a test that proves that the given pattern is NOT a SNAPSHOT
>>> version...
>>>
>>> Something like this:
>>>
>>> assertEquals( false, ArtifactUtils.isSnapshot(
>>> "1.2.3-20090413X094722-2"));
>>>
>>> WDYT ?
>>>
>>> Kind regards
>>> Karl Heinz Marbaise
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 06/05/18 21:15, Michael Osipov wrote:
>>>> Am 2018-05-06 um 21:08 schrieb Karl Heinz Marbaise:
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>> I second MNG-6403 for 3.5.4 we should write a test for this to be
>>>>> sure this does not happen again...
>>>> Do you have anything specific in mind?
>>>> I have updated the branch and added a test to ArtifactUtilsTest. Is
>>>> that sufficient?
>>>> Michael
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
Re: Second MNG-6403
Posted by Michael Osipov <mi...@apache.org>.
Am 2018-05-07 um 23:35 schrieb Robert Scholte:
> On Sun, 06 May 2018 21:32:18 +0200, Karl Heinz Marbaise
> <kh...@gmx.de> wrote:
>
>> Hi Michael,
>>
>> two things are coming into my mind:
>>
>> I stumbled over one thing which is:
>>
>> Why do we have the tests in maven-compat and not in maven-artifact ?
>> Shouldn't they be in maven-artifact instead of maven-compat ?
>
> +1
Done is subsequent commmit:
https://github.com/apache/maven/commit/9021d66e53f979b0664677b7977c650e71d51d1d
Unit tests pass, as well as ITs.
Are we good to merge to master?
>>
>> Furthermore if I recap the code and the tests I would think we should
>> add a test that proves that the given pattern is NOT a SNAPSHOT
>> version...
>>
>> Something like this:
>>
>> assertEquals( false, ArtifactUtils.isSnapshot(
>> "1.2.3-20090413X094722-2"));
>>
>> WDYT ?
>>
>> Kind regards
>> Karl Heinz Marbaise
>>
>>
>>
>> On 06/05/18 21:15, Michael Osipov wrote:
>>> Am 2018-05-06 um 21:08 schrieb Karl Heinz Marbaise:
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> I second MNG-6403 for 3.5.4 we should write a test for this to be
>>>> sure this does not happen again...
>>> Do you have anything specific in mind?
>>> I have updated the branch and added a test to ArtifactUtilsTest. Is
>>> that sufficient?
>>> Michael
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
Re: Second MNG-6403
Posted by Robert Scholte <rf...@apache.org>.
On Sun, 06 May 2018 21:32:18 +0200, Karl Heinz Marbaise
<kh...@gmx.de> wrote:
> Hi Michael,
>
> two things are coming into my mind:
>
> I stumbled over one thing which is:
>
> Why do we have the tests in maven-compat and not in maven-artifact ?
> Shouldn't they be in maven-artifact instead of maven-compat ?
+1
>
>
> Furthermore if I recap the code and the tests I would think we should
> add a test that proves that the given pattern is NOT a SNAPSHOT
> version...
>
> Something like this:
>
> assertEquals( false, ArtifactUtils.isSnapshot(
> "1.2.3-20090413X094722-2"));
>
> WDYT ?
>
> Kind regards
> Karl Heinz Marbaise
>
>
>
> On 06/05/18 21:15, Michael Osipov wrote:
>> Am 2018-05-06 um 21:08 schrieb Karl Heinz Marbaise:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I second MNG-6403 for 3.5.4 we should write a test for this to be sure
>>> this does not happen again...
>> Do you have anything specific in mind?
>> I have updated the branch and added a test to ArtifactUtilsTest. Is
>> that sufficient?
>> Michael
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
Re: Second MNG-6403
Posted by Michael Osipov <mi...@apache.org>.
Am 2018-05-06 um 21:32 schrieb Karl Heinz Marbaise:
> Hi Michael,
>
> two things are coming into my mind:
>
> I stumbled over one thing which is:
>
> Why do we have the tests in maven-compat and not in maven-artifact ?
> Shouldn't they be in maven-artifact instead of maven-compat ?
That is a very good question...
> Furthermore if I recap the code and the tests I would think we should
> add a test that proves that the given pattern is NOT a SNAPSHOT version...
>
> Something like this:
>
> assertEquals( false, ArtifactUtils.isSnapshot( "1.2.3-20090413X094722-2"));
Good idea, added and pushed to the branch.
> Kind regards
> Karl Heinz Marbaise
>
>
>
> On 06/05/18 21:15, Michael Osipov wrote:
>> Am 2018-05-06 um 21:08 schrieb Karl Heinz Marbaise:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I second MNG-6403 for 3.5.4 we should write a test for this to be
>>> sure this does not happen again...
>>
>> Do you have anything specific in mind?
>>
>> I have updated the branch and added a test to ArtifactUtilsTest. Is
>> that sufficient?
>>
>> Michael
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
Re: Second MNG-6403
Posted by Karl Heinz Marbaise <kh...@gmx.de>.
Hi Michael,
two things are coming into my mind:
I stumbled over one thing which is:
Why do we have the tests in maven-compat and not in maven-artifact ?
Shouldn't they be in maven-artifact instead of maven-compat ?
Furthermore if I recap the code and the tests I would think we should
add a test that proves that the given pattern is NOT a SNAPSHOT version...
Something like this:
assertEquals( false, ArtifactUtils.isSnapshot( "1.2.3-20090413X094722-2"));
WDYT ?
Kind regards
Karl Heinz Marbaise
On 06/05/18 21:15, Michael Osipov wrote:
> Am 2018-05-06 um 21:08 schrieb Karl Heinz Marbaise:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I second MNG-6403 for 3.5.4 we should write a test for this to be sure
>> this does not happen again...
>
> Do you have anything specific in mind?
>
> I have updated the branch and added a test to ArtifactUtilsTest. Is that
> sufficient?
>
> Michael
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
Re: Second MNG-6403
Posted by Michael Osipov <mi...@apache.org>.
Am 2018-05-06 um 21:08 schrieb Karl Heinz Marbaise:
> Hi,
>
> I second MNG-6403 for 3.5.4 we should write a test for this to be sure
> this does not happen again...
Do you have anything specific in mind?
I have updated the branch and added a test to ArtifactUtilsTest. Is that
sufficient?
Michael
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
Re: Second MNG-6403
Posted by Karl Heinz Marbaise <kh...@gmx.de>.
Hi,
I second MNG-6403 for 3.5.4 we should write a test for this to be sure
this does not happen again...
Good catch...
Kind regards
Karl Heinz Marbaise
On 06/05/18 00:54, Michael Osipov wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> who seconds MNG-6403 for 3.5.4? A simple fix where we forgot to escape a
> period in a regex pattern.
>
> Michael
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org