You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to surefire-dev@maven.apache.org by Stephen Connolly <st...@gmail.com> on 2010/08/05 14:15:26 UTC
Re: svn commit: r982558 - in /maven/surefire/trunk:
maven-failsafe-plugin/pom.xml maven-surefire-plugin/pom.xml
maven-surefire-report-plugin/pom.xml
I can roll it back out.... just wanted to ensure that because I was
specifying the requirements that they would be stated on the site
On 5 August 2010 13:13, Benjamin Bentmann <be...@udo.edu> wrote:
> Hi Stephen,
>
>
> Author: stephenc
>> Date: Thu Aug 5 12:03:07 2010
>> New Revision: 982558
>>
>> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=982558&view=rev
>> Log:
>> SUREFIRE-623 finessing
>>
>> Modified:
>> maven/surefire/trunk/maven-failsafe-plugin/pom.xml
>> maven/surefire/trunk/maven-surefire-plugin/pom.xml
>> maven/surefire/trunk/maven-surefire-report-plugin/pom.xml
>>
>> Modified: maven/surefire/trunk/maven-failsafe-plugin/pom.xml
>> URL:
>> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/maven/surefire/trunk/maven-failsafe-plugin/pom.xml?rev=982558&r1=982557&r2=982558&view=diff
>>
>> ==============================================================================
>> --- maven/surefire/trunk/maven-failsafe-plugin/pom.xml (original)
>> +++ maven/surefire/trunk/maven-failsafe-plugin/pom.xml Thu Aug 5 12:03:07
>> 2010
>> @@ -244,6 +244,7 @@
>> <version>2.6</version>
>> <configuration>
>> <requirements>
>> +<maven>2.0.9</maven>
>> <jdk>1.4</jdk>
>> </requirements>
>> </configuration>
>>
>
> Why exactly is this duplication needed given the plugins have
> <prerequisites> on the Maven version?
>
>
> Benjamin
>
Re: svn commit: r982558 - in /maven/surefire/trunk:
maven-failsafe-plugin/pom.xml maven-surefire-plugin/pom.xml
maven-surefire-report-plugin/pom.xml
Posted by Stephen Connolly <st...@gmail.com>.
ok, i'll back it out
On 5 August 2010 13:20, Benjamin Bentmann <be...@udo.edu> wrote:
> Stephen Connolly wrote:
>
> I can roll it back out.... just wanted to ensure that because I was
>> specifying the requirements that they would be stated on the site
>>
>
> Well, the maven-plugin-plugin picks the <prerequisite> tag by default to
> tell the minimum Maven version. Unless this really fails here, the
> duplication and potential for later divergence doesn't seem justified.
>
>
> Benjamin
>
Re: svn commit: r982558 - in /maven/surefire/trunk: maven-failsafe-plugin/pom.xml
maven-surefire-plugin/pom.xml maven-surefire-report-plugin/pom.xml
Posted by Benjamin Bentmann <be...@udo.edu>.
Stephen Connolly wrote:
> I can roll it back out.... just wanted to ensure that because I was
> specifying the requirements that they would be stated on the site
Well, the maven-plugin-plugin picks the <prerequisite> tag by default to
tell the minimum Maven version. Unless this really fails here, the
duplication and potential for later divergence doesn't seem justified.
Benjamin
Re: svn commit: r982558 - in /maven/surefire/trunk:
maven-failsafe-plugin/pom.xml maven-surefire-plugin/pom.xml
maven-surefire-report-plugin/pom.xml
Posted by Kristian Rosenvold <kr...@gmail.com>.
Yes, you fixed the issue. Cool !
;)
K
Den 5. aug. 2010 kl. 15:35 skrev Stephen Connolly
<st...@gmail.com>:
> I'm fine with us dropping support for 1.3... people can still use surefire
> 2.2 if they need to run with jdk 1.3... or we can revisit surefire booter
> but perhaps a vote.
>
> All I was fixing is the docs will now say need 1.4, so issue raised is fixed
> ;-)
>
> -Stephen
>
> On 5 August 2010 14:24, Kristian Rosenvold <kr...@gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> Unfortunately I dont Think this is enough? The surefire booter hasnt
>> been 1.3 compliant for 5 years (give or take a little).
>>
>> SUREFIRE-623 has some details and I Think the fix is to drop 1.3
>> support from 2.6 ...?
>>
>> Kristian
>>
>>
>> Den 5. aug. 2010 kl. 15:15 skrev Stephen Connolly
>> <st...@gmail.com>:
>>
>>> SUREFIRE
>>
Re: svn commit: r982558 - in /maven/surefire/trunk:
maven-failsafe-plugin/pom.xml maven-surefire-plugin/pom.xml
maven-surefire-report-plugin/pom.xml
Posted by Stephen Connolly <st...@gmail.com>.
I'm fine with us dropping support for 1.3... people can still use surefire
2.2 if they need to run with jdk 1.3... or we can revisit surefire booter
but perhaps a vote.
All I was fixing is the docs will now say need 1.4, so issue raised is fixed
;-)
-Stephen
On 5 August 2010 14:24, Kristian Rosenvold <kr...@gmail.com>wrote:
> Unfortunately I dont Think this is enough? The surefire booter hasnt
> been 1.3 compliant for 5 years (give or take a little).
>
> SUREFIRE-623 has some details and I Think the fix is to drop 1.3
> support from 2.6 ...?
>
> Kristian
>
>
> Den 5. aug. 2010 kl. 15:15 skrev Stephen Connolly
> <st...@gmail.com>:
>
> > SUREFIRE
>
Re: svn commit: r982558 - in /maven/surefire/trunk:
maven-failsafe-plugin/pom.xml maven-surefire-plugin/pom.xml
maven-surefire-report-plugin/pom.xml
Posted by Kristian Rosenvold <kr...@gmail.com>.
Unfortunately I dont Think this is enough? The surefire booter hasnt
been 1.3 compliant for 5 years (give or take a little).
SUREFIRE-623 has some details and I Think the fix is to drop 1.3
support from 2.6 ...?
Kristian
Den 5. aug. 2010 kl. 15:15 skrev Stephen Connolly
<st...@gmail.com>:
> SUREFIRE
Re: svn commit: r982558 - in /maven/surefire/trunk:
maven-failsafe-plugin/pom.xml maven-surefire-plugin/pom.xml
maven-surefire-report-plugin/pom.xml
Posted by Stephen Connolly <st...@gmail.com>.
Toolchains dude toolchains
Maven inself requires 1.4 to run for the 2.0 line AFAIK and 1.5 for the
2.2.1+ line so those plugins require 1.4 to run
But the toolchains support would allow running tests using forking on JDK
1.3
-Stephen
On 5 August 2010 14:12, Kristian Rosenvold <kr...@gmail.com>wrote:
> Does this mean we have now officially caved in and dropped surefire 1.3
> support ? (Looking for champagne bottle)
>
> Kristian
>
> Den 05.08.2010 14:15, skrev Stephen Connolly:
>
> I can roll it back out.... just wanted to ensure that because I was
>> specifying the requirements that they would be stated on the site
>>
>> On 5 August 2010 13:13, Benjamin Bentmann<be...@udo.edu>
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>> Hi Stephen,
>>>
>>>
>>> Author: stephenc
>>>
>>>
>>>> Date: Thu Aug 5 12:03:07 2010
>>>> New Revision: 982558
>>>>
>>>> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=982558&view=rev
>>>> Log:
>>>> SUREFIRE-623 finessing
>>>>
>>>> Modified:
>>>> maven/surefire/trunk/maven-failsafe-plugin/pom.xml
>>>> maven/surefire/trunk/maven-surefire-plugin/pom.xml
>>>> maven/surefire/trunk/maven-surefire-report-plugin/pom.xml
>>>>
>>>> Modified: maven/surefire/trunk/maven-failsafe-plugin/pom.xml
>>>> URL:
>>>>
>>>> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/maven/surefire/trunk/maven-failsafe-plugin/pom.xml?rev=982558&r1=982557&r2=982558&view=diff
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ==============================================================================
>>>> --- maven/surefire/trunk/maven-failsafe-plugin/pom.xml (original)
>>>> +++ maven/surefire/trunk/maven-failsafe-plugin/pom.xml Thu Aug 5
>>>> 12:03:07
>>>> 2010
>>>> @@ -244,6 +244,7 @@
>>>> <version>2.6</version>
>>>> <configuration>
>>>> <requirements>
>>>> +<maven>2.0.9</maven>
>>>> <jdk>1.4</jdk>
>>>> </requirements>
>>>> </configuration>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Why exactly is this duplication needed given the plugins have
>>> <prerequisites> on the Maven version?
>>>
>>>
>>> Benjamin
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
Re: svn commit: r982558 - in /maven/surefire/trunk: maven-failsafe-plugin/pom.xml
maven-surefire-plugin/pom.xml maven-surefire-report-plugin/pom.xml
Posted by Kristian Rosenvold <kr...@gmail.com>.
Does this mean we have now officially caved in and dropped surefire 1.3
support ? (Looking for champagne bottle)
Kristian
Den 05.08.2010 14:15, skrev Stephen Connolly:
> I can roll it back out.... just wanted to ensure that because I was
> specifying the requirements that they would be stated on the site
>
> On 5 August 2010 13:13, Benjamin Bentmann<be...@udo.edu> wrote:
>
>
>> Hi Stephen,
>>
>>
>> Author: stephenc
>>
>>> Date: Thu Aug 5 12:03:07 2010
>>> New Revision: 982558
>>>
>>> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=982558&view=rev
>>> Log:
>>> SUREFIRE-623 finessing
>>>
>>> Modified:
>>> maven/surefire/trunk/maven-failsafe-plugin/pom.xml
>>> maven/surefire/trunk/maven-surefire-plugin/pom.xml
>>> maven/surefire/trunk/maven-surefire-report-plugin/pom.xml
>>>
>>> Modified: maven/surefire/trunk/maven-failsafe-plugin/pom.xml
>>> URL:
>>> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/maven/surefire/trunk/maven-failsafe-plugin/pom.xml?rev=982558&r1=982557&r2=982558&view=diff
>>>
>>> ==============================================================================
>>> --- maven/surefire/trunk/maven-failsafe-plugin/pom.xml (original)
>>> +++ maven/surefire/trunk/maven-failsafe-plugin/pom.xml Thu Aug 5 12:03:07
>>> 2010
>>> @@ -244,6 +244,7 @@
>>> <version>2.6</version>
>>> <configuration>
>>> <requirements>
>>> +<maven>2.0.9</maven>
>>> <jdk>1.4</jdk>
>>> </requirements>
>>> </configuration>
>>>
>>>
>> Why exactly is this duplication needed given the plugins have
>> <prerequisites> on the Maven version?
>>
>>
>> Benjamin
>>
>>
>