You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to scm-dev@maven.apache.org by Torbjørn Smørgrav <ts...@stavanger.oilfield.slb.com> on 2006/02/14 10:00:49 UTC

Jira assignee

How do I assign issues to myself?

T

-----Original Message-----
From: Torbjørn Smørgrav [mailto:tsmoergrav@stavanger.oilfield.slb.com]
Sent: 14. februar 2006 08:56
To: scm-dev@maven.apache.org
Subject: ScmResult conventions


I see that some unit tests are asserting that the provider message in a
ScmResult
is null if the result is successfull. Is there any reason for that?
For me I would like to have the ability to get feedback from the provider
even on success.

Now if its a reason, is the success field in the ScmResult class redundant?

The patch I attatched to issue SCM-160 removed some of those asserts... I'll
put them back if
they are required.

Regards
Torbjørn

-----Original Message-----
From: Emmanuel Venisse (JIRA) [mailto:jira@codehaus.org]
Sent: 13. februar 2006 21:37
To: scm-dev@maven.apache.org
Subject: [jira] Commented: (SCM-160) Refactored tck tests, added
changelog tck test and added changelog, diff test for the bazaar
provider


    [ http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/SCM-160?page=comments#action_58542 ]

Emmanuel Venisse commented on SCM-160:
--------------------------------------

ScmTckTestCase is missing

> Refactored tck tests, added changelog tck test and added changelog, diff
test for the bazaar provider
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------
>
>          Key: SCM-160
>          URL: http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/SCM-160
>      Project: Maven SCM
>         Type: Improvement

>   Components: maven-scm-provider-bazaar
>     Versions: 1.0-beta-3
>  Environment: Tested on WinXp and Linux for cvs, svn and bazaar
>     Reporter: Torbjørn EIkli Smørgrav
>  Attachments: MNG-160-maven-scm-provider-bazaar.patch,
MNG-160-maven-scm-test.patch
>
>
> Short summary: Refactored code into a new baseclass: ScmTckTestCase. Added
tests to Bazaar.
> Working with my bazaar tests I found out that the tck test module had some
redundant code.
> So I took the liberty to refactor the tck package a bit before I added the
final tests to the bazaar provider.
> I tested the refactored test module with cvs, svn and bazaar on WinXp and
Linux.
> (Bazaar had trouble with linux and bazaar 0.6, but that turned out to be a
Bazaar bug that was fixed in post 0.6 versions of Bazaar)
> The refactoring consist mainly of centralizing duplicated blocks of code
into a new test base class: ScmTckTestCase. And
> using a common setUp() method for all tck tests.
> If you find this class ok - then you will most likly find the rest ok.

--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators:
   http://jira.codehaus.org/secure/Administrators.jspa
-
For more information on JIRA, see:
   http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira


RE: Jira assignee

Posted by Torbjørn Smørgrav <ts...@stavanger.oilfield.slb.com>.
Thanks

-----Original Message-----
From: Emmanuel Venisse [mailto:emmanuel@venisse.net]
Sent: 14. februar 2006 10:23
To: scm-dev@maven.apache.org
Subject: Re: Jira assignee


You can now, i added you in developers list in jira

Emmanuel

Torbjørn Smørgrav a écrit :
> How do I assign issues to myself?
>
> T
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Torbjørn Smørgrav [mailto:tsmoergrav@stavanger.oilfield.slb.com]
> Sent: 14. februar 2006 08:56
> To: scm-dev@maven.apache.org
> Subject: ScmResult conventions
>
>
> I see that some unit tests are asserting that the provider message in a
> ScmResult
> is null if the result is successfull. Is there any reason for that?
> For me I would like to have the ability to get feedback from the provider
> even on success.
>
> Now if its a reason, is the success field in the ScmResult class
redundant?
>
> The patch I attatched to issue SCM-160 removed some of those asserts...
I'll
> put them back if
> they are required.
>
> Regards
> Torbjørn
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Emmanuel Venisse (JIRA) [mailto:jira@codehaus.org]
> Sent: 13. februar 2006 21:37
> To: scm-dev@maven.apache.org
> Subject: [jira] Commented: (SCM-160) Refactored tck tests, added
> changelog tck test and added changelog, diff test for the bazaar
> provider
>
>
>     [ http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/SCM-160?page=comments#action_58542 ]
>
> Emmanuel Venisse commented on SCM-160:
> --------------------------------------
>
> ScmTckTestCase is missing
>
>
>>Refactored tck tests, added changelog tck test and added changelog, diff
>
> test for the bazaar provider
>
>>--------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> ---------------------------
>
>>         Key: SCM-160
>>         URL: http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/SCM-160
>>     Project: Maven SCM
>>        Type: Improvement
>
>
>>  Components: maven-scm-provider-bazaar
>>    Versions: 1.0-beta-3
>> Environment: Tested on WinXp and Linux for cvs, svn and bazaar
>>    Reporter: Torbjørn EIkli Smørgrav
>> Attachments: MNG-160-maven-scm-provider-bazaar.patch,
>
> MNG-160-maven-scm-test.patch
>
>>
>>Short summary: Refactored code into a new baseclass: ScmTckTestCase. Added
>
> tests to Bazaar.
>
>>Working with my bazaar tests I found out that the tck test module had some
>
> redundant code.
>
>>So I took the liberty to refactor the tck package a bit before I added the
>
> final tests to the bazaar provider.
>
>>I tested the refactored test module with cvs, svn and bazaar on WinXp and
>
> Linux.
>
>>(Bazaar had trouble with linux and bazaar 0.6, but that turned out to be a
>
> Bazaar bug that was fixed in post 0.6 versions of Bazaar)
>
>>The refactoring consist mainly of centralizing duplicated blocks of code
>
> into a new test base class: ScmTckTestCase. And
>
>>using a common setUp() method for all tck tests.
>>If you find this class ok - then you will most likly find the rest ok.
>
>
> --
> This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
> -
> If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators:
>    http://jira.codehaus.org/secure/Administrators.jspa
> -
> For more information on JIRA, see:
>    http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
>
>
>
>


Re: Jira assignee

Posted by Emmanuel Venisse <em...@venisse.net>.
You can now, i added you in developers list in jira

Emmanuel

Torbjørn Smørgrav a écrit :
> How do I assign issues to myself?
> 
> T
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Torbjørn Smørgrav [mailto:tsmoergrav@stavanger.oilfield.slb.com]
> Sent: 14. februar 2006 08:56
> To: scm-dev@maven.apache.org
> Subject: ScmResult conventions
> 
> 
> I see that some unit tests are asserting that the provider message in a
> ScmResult
> is null if the result is successfull. Is there any reason for that?
> For me I would like to have the ability to get feedback from the provider
> even on success.
> 
> Now if its a reason, is the success field in the ScmResult class redundant?
> 
> The patch I attatched to issue SCM-160 removed some of those asserts... I'll
> put them back if
> they are required.
> 
> Regards
> Torbjørn
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Emmanuel Venisse (JIRA) [mailto:jira@codehaus.org]
> Sent: 13. februar 2006 21:37
> To: scm-dev@maven.apache.org
> Subject: [jira] Commented: (SCM-160) Refactored tck tests, added
> changelog tck test and added changelog, diff test for the bazaar
> provider
> 
> 
>     [ http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/SCM-160?page=comments#action_58542 ]
> 
> Emmanuel Venisse commented on SCM-160:
> --------------------------------------
> 
> ScmTckTestCase is missing
> 
> 
>>Refactored tck tests, added changelog tck test and added changelog, diff
> 
> test for the bazaar provider
> 
>>--------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> ---------------------------
> 
>>         Key: SCM-160
>>         URL: http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/SCM-160
>>     Project: Maven SCM
>>        Type: Improvement
> 
> 
>>  Components: maven-scm-provider-bazaar
>>    Versions: 1.0-beta-3
>> Environment: Tested on WinXp and Linux for cvs, svn and bazaar
>>    Reporter: Torbjørn EIkli Smørgrav
>> Attachments: MNG-160-maven-scm-provider-bazaar.patch,
> 
> MNG-160-maven-scm-test.patch
> 
>>
>>Short summary: Refactored code into a new baseclass: ScmTckTestCase. Added
> 
> tests to Bazaar.
> 
>>Working with my bazaar tests I found out that the tck test module had some
> 
> redundant code.
> 
>>So I took the liberty to refactor the tck package a bit before I added the
> 
> final tests to the bazaar provider.
> 
>>I tested the refactored test module with cvs, svn and bazaar on WinXp and
> 
> Linux.
> 
>>(Bazaar had trouble with linux and bazaar 0.6, but that turned out to be a
> 
> Bazaar bug that was fixed in post 0.6 versions of Bazaar)
> 
>>The refactoring consist mainly of centralizing duplicated blocks of code
> 
> into a new test base class: ScmTckTestCase. And
> 
>>using a common setUp() method for all tck tests.
>>If you find this class ok - then you will most likly find the rest ok.
> 
> 
> --
> This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
> -
> If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators:
>    http://jira.codehaus.org/secure/Administrators.jspa
> -
> For more information on JIRA, see:
>    http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
> 
> 
> 
>