You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@maven.apache.org by John Casey <jd...@commonjava.org> on 2008/05/07 16:37:13 UTC
Question about it0074
Hi everyone,
I'm just wondering about what it0074 is trying to accomplish. It's
failing with the trunk version of Maven, and when I started digging
into it, the description in the POM and the corresponding JUnit test
case don't seem to match either the POM configuration or the code in
the unit test. In general, I think it's a good idea to move away from
using core plugins inside integration tests since it makes the ITs
vulnerable to all sorts of external changes (I know, this used to be
normal). I honestly don't remember whether I was the one to write
this integration test originally, but looking at it now, it appears
that it's in dire need of help.
Can anyone help shed light on the purpose of this test and how it
operates, or should I just replace it with something a little clearer?
Thanks,
-john
---
John Casey
Committer and PMC Member, Apache Maven
mail: jdcasey at commonjava dot org
blog: http://www.ejlife.net/blogs/john
rss: http://feeds.feedburner.com/ejlife/john
Re: Question about it0074
Posted by Brett Porter <br...@apache.org>.
On 08/05/2008, at 1:00 AM, John Casey wrote:
> In the POM and the unit test comments, it says it's meant to ensure
> plugin-level configuration doesn't get wiped out by execution-level
> configuration...but there is no plugin-level configuration (unless
> I'm missing something). That seems to be at least part of what's
> confusing me here.
I thought the compiler plugin had a default setting for includes?
That was my assumption, but I could be wrong.
- Brett
>
>
> -john
>
>
>
> On May 7, 2008, at 10:56 AM, Brett Porter wrote:
>
>> On 08/05/2008, at 12:37 AM, John Casey wrote:
>>
>>> Hi everyone,
>>>
>>> I'm just wondering about what it0074 is trying to accomplish. It's
>>> failing with the trunk version of Maven, and when I started
>>> digging into it, the description in the POM and the corresponding
>>> JUnit test case don't seem to match either the POM configuration
>>> or the code in the unit test. In general, I think it's a good idea
>>> to move away from using core plugins inside integration tests
>>> since it makes the ITs vulnerable to all sorts of external changes
>>> (I know, this used to be normal).
>>
>> agreed
>>
>>> I honestly don't remember whether I was the one to write this
>>> integration test originally, but looking at it now, it appears
>>> that it's in dire need of help.
>>
>> http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MNG-781
>> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=rev&revision=292047
>>
>> Yep, it's yours :)
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Can anyone help shed light on the purpose of this test and how it
>>> operates, or should I just replace it with something a little
>>> clearer?
>>
>> I would suggest focusing on why it passes in 2.0.x and not 2.1?
>>
>> Other than that... it seems the POM is the right one (according to
>> the description), and the goals that are executed are incorrect.
>>
>> - Brett
>>
>> --
>> Brett Porter
>> brett@apache.org
>> http://blogs.exist.com/bporter/
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
>>
>
> ---
> John Casey
> Committer and PMC Member, Apache Maven
> mail: jdcasey at commonjava dot org
> blog: http://www.ejlife.net/blogs/john
> rss: http://feeds.feedburner.com/ejlife/john
>
>
--
Brett Porter
brett@apache.org
http://blogs.exist.com/bporter/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
Re: Question about it0074
Posted by John Casey <jd...@commonjava.org>.
In the POM and the unit test comments, it says it's meant to ensure
plugin-level configuration doesn't get wiped out by execution-level
configuration...but there is no plugin-level configuration (unless
I'm missing something). That seems to be at least part of what's
confusing me here.
-john
On May 7, 2008, at 10:56 AM, Brett Porter wrote:
> On 08/05/2008, at 12:37 AM, John Casey wrote:
>
>> Hi everyone,
>>
>> I'm just wondering about what it0074 is trying to accomplish. It's
>> failing with the trunk version of Maven, and when I started
>> digging into it, the description in the POM and the corresponding
>> JUnit test case don't seem to match either the POM configuration
>> or the code in the unit test. In general, I think it's a good idea
>> to move away from using core plugins inside integration tests
>> since it makes the ITs vulnerable to all sorts of external changes
>> (I know, this used to be normal).
>
> agreed
>
>> I honestly don't remember whether I was the one to write this
>> integration test originally, but looking at it now, it appears
>> that it's in dire need of help.
>
> http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MNG-781
> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=rev&revision=292047
>
> Yep, it's yours :)
>
>>
>>
>> Can anyone help shed light on the purpose of this test and how it
>> operates, or should I just replace it with something a little
>> clearer?
>
> I would suggest focusing on why it passes in 2.0.x and not 2.1?
>
> Other than that... it seems the POM is the right one (according to
> the description), and the goals that are executed are incorrect.
>
> - Brett
>
> --
> Brett Porter
> brett@apache.org
> http://blogs.exist.com/bporter/
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
>
---
John Casey
Committer and PMC Member, Apache Maven
mail: jdcasey at commonjava dot org
blog: http://www.ejlife.net/blogs/john
rss: http://feeds.feedburner.com/ejlife/john
Re: Question about it0074
Posted by Brett Porter <br...@apache.org>.
On 08/05/2008, at 12:37 AM, John Casey wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>
> I'm just wondering about what it0074 is trying to accomplish. It's
> failing with the trunk version of Maven, and when I started digging
> into it, the description in the POM and the corresponding JUnit test
> case don't seem to match either the POM configuration or the code in
> the unit test. In general, I think it's a good idea to move away
> from using core plugins inside integration tests since it makes the
> ITs vulnerable to all sorts of external changes (I know, this used
> to be normal).
agreed
> I honestly don't remember whether I was the one to write this
> integration test originally, but looking at it now, it appears that
> it's in dire need of help.
http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MNG-781
http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=rev&revision=292047
Yep, it's yours :)
>
>
> Can anyone help shed light on the purpose of this test and how it
> operates, or should I just replace it with something a little clearer?
I would suggest focusing on why it passes in 2.0.x and not 2.1?
Other than that... it seems the POM is the right one (according to the
description), and the goals that are executed are incorrect.
- Brett
--
Brett Porter
brett@apache.org
http://blogs.exist.com/bporter/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org