You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@maven.apache.org by Igor Fedorenko <ig...@ifedorenko.com> on 2014/01/06 13:51:16 UTC

mng-5530 vs mng5530-mojo-execution-scope

Stephen,

I would prefer to keep the original test name, i.e.
mng5530-mojo-execution-scope. Having both the JIRA issue id and short
description of the test makes it much easier to understand what the test
is supposed to do and still be able to find any additional information
if needed.

Can you explain what problems you see with the original test name?

https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=maven-integration-testing.git;a=commit;h=d4f4d4009d23a77254c20d4c2c8a2b8eccc91e47

--
Regards,
Igor

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org


Re: mng-5530 vs mng5530-mojo-execution-scope

Posted by Igor Fedorenko <ig...@ifedorenko.com>.

On 1/6/2014, 11:35, Stephen Connolly wrote:
> I think once we release 3.2.0 then we can revert back to just 3.2.0 and not
> the version range
>


This was my plan. Sorry I didn't communicate this better.

--
Regards,
Igor



>
> On 6 January 2014 16:16, Jason van Zyl <ja...@tesla.io> wrote:
>
>> In this particular case once we release 3.2.0 then [3.2.0,) will be
>> sufficient and not need to be changed.
>>
>> On Jan 6, 2014, at 10:51 AM, Stephen Connolly <
>> stephen.alan.connolly@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> I looked into that... the issue here is that the code does not promise to
>>> be able to give you a version of Maven, IOW there are some cases where
>> the
>>> test harness will just give up and say "Oh the maven version is null
>>> because I can't figure it out... I'll ignore all skips now... good
>> luck"...
>>>
>>> Otherwise the way is to mage getMavenVersion() protected and then you can
>>> do verifier.setSystemProperty("foo",getMavenVersion()); and then use
>> ${foo}
>>> and rely on it being expanded at run time from the system properties...
>>> nastyish but will work... we cannot use filtering as the target maven
>>> version is not available until the test suite starts running...
>>>
>>>
>>> On 6 January 2014 15:46, Jason van Zyl <ja...@tesla.io> wrote:
>>>
>>>> We don't really have an easy way to specify an interim version that
>> needs
>>>> to be tested. Once 3.2 is release it can be updated and locked down. If
>> we
>>>> always want to test the version exercised by the ITs we'll have to
>> figure
>>>> that out. Maybe as simple as exposing a property we can interpolate into
>>>> the POM.
>>>>
>>>> On Jan 6, 2014, at 10:40 AM, Stephen Connolly <
>>>> stephen.alan.connolly@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> The issue was he had hard-coded 3.1.2-SNAPSHOT in the test resource. I
>>>>> changed that to [3.1.2-SNAPSHOT,) which gets 3.2.0-SNAPSHOT working for
>>>>> now... but is still hacky...
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 6 January 2014 15:36, Jason van Zyl <ja...@tesla.io> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Jan 6, 2014, at 9:07 AM, Stephen Connolly <
>>>>>> stephen.alan.connolly@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The test name was not the issue, though not keeping with the pattern
>>>> is,
>>>>>>> e.g. `mng-5530-blah-blah-blah` if you must but not
>>>>>> `mng5530-blah-blah-blah`
>>>>>>> as all the other tests start with `mng-` so they are sorted
>>>> consistently
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Sure, that's a valid point. But I think the extra information is
>> good. I
>>>>>> don't see anything wrong with mng-xxxx-short-description as a pattern.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The real issue was that the test case itself broke when I switched
>> the
>>>>>>> Maven version from 3.1.2-SNAPSHOT to 3.2.0-SNAPSHOT because the tests
>>>> run
>>>>>>> in a clean repository and there is thus no 3.1.2-SNAPSHOT artifacts
>> to
>>>>>>> resolve for the plugin side of the test case
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The version of Maven you are running needs to be installed in the
>> local
>>>>>> repo you are running the ITs against, but I ran them all day yesterday
>>>>>> without issue. I'll fetch and give it a whirl.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 6 January 2014 12:51, Igor Fedorenko <ig...@ifedorenko.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Stephen,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I would prefer to keep the original test name, i.e.
>>>>>>>> mng5530-mojo-execution-scope. Having both the JIRA issue id and
>> short
>>>>>>>> description of the test makes it much easier to understand what the
>>>> test
>>>>>>>> is supposed to do and still be able to find any additional
>> information
>>>>>>>> if needed.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Can you explain what problems you see with the original test name?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=maven-integration-
>>>>>>>> testing.git;a=commit;h=d4f4d4009d23a77254c20d4c2c8a2b8eccc91e47
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>> Igor
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
>>>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Jason
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ----------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>> Jason van Zyl
>>>>>> Founder,  Apache Maven
>>>>>> http://twitter.com/jvanzyl
>>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>>
>>>> Jason
>>>>
>>>> ----------------------------------------------------------
>>>> Jason van Zyl
>>>> Founder,  Apache Maven
>>>> http://twitter.com/jvanzyl
>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Jason
>>
>> ----------------------------------------------------------
>> Jason van Zyl
>> Founder,  Apache Maven
>> http://twitter.com/jvanzyl
>> ---------------------------------------------------------
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org


Re: mng-5530 vs mng5530-mojo-execution-scope

Posted by Stephen Connolly <st...@gmail.com>.
I think once we release 3.2.0 then we can revert back to just 3.2.0 and not
the version range


On 6 January 2014 16:16, Jason van Zyl <ja...@tesla.io> wrote:

> In this particular case once we release 3.2.0 then [3.2.0,) will be
> sufficient and not need to be changed.
>
> On Jan 6, 2014, at 10:51 AM, Stephen Connolly <
> stephen.alan.connolly@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > I looked into that... the issue here is that the code does not promise to
> > be able to give you a version of Maven, IOW there are some cases where
> the
> > test harness will just give up and say "Oh the maven version is null
> > because I can't figure it out... I'll ignore all skips now... good
> luck"...
> >
> > Otherwise the way is to mage getMavenVersion() protected and then you can
> > do verifier.setSystemProperty("foo",getMavenVersion()); and then use
> ${foo}
> > and rely on it being expanded at run time from the system properties...
> > nastyish but will work... we cannot use filtering as the target maven
> > version is not available until the test suite starts running...
> >
> >
> > On 6 January 2014 15:46, Jason van Zyl <ja...@tesla.io> wrote:
> >
> >> We don't really have an easy way to specify an interim version that
> needs
> >> to be tested. Once 3.2 is release it can be updated and locked down. If
> we
> >> always want to test the version exercised by the ITs we'll have to
> figure
> >> that out. Maybe as simple as exposing a property we can interpolate into
> >> the POM.
> >>
> >> On Jan 6, 2014, at 10:40 AM, Stephen Connolly <
> >> stephen.alan.connolly@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>> The issue was he had hard-coded 3.1.2-SNAPSHOT in the test resource. I
> >>> changed that to [3.1.2-SNAPSHOT,) which gets 3.2.0-SNAPSHOT working for
> >>> now... but is still hacky...
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On 6 January 2014 15:36, Jason van Zyl <ja...@tesla.io> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>>
> >>>> On Jan 6, 2014, at 9:07 AM, Stephen Connolly <
> >>>> stephen.alan.connolly@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> The test name was not the issue, though not keeping with the pattern
> >> is,
> >>>>> e.g. `mng-5530-blah-blah-blah` if you must but not
> >>>> `mng5530-blah-blah-blah`
> >>>>> as all the other tests start with `mng-` so they are sorted
> >> consistently
> >>>>
> >>>> Sure, that's a valid point. But I think the extra information is
> good. I
> >>>> don't see anything wrong with mng-xxxx-short-description as a pattern.
> >>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> The real issue was that the test case itself broke when I switched
> the
> >>>>> Maven version from 3.1.2-SNAPSHOT to 3.2.0-SNAPSHOT because the tests
> >> run
> >>>>> in a clean repository and there is thus no 3.1.2-SNAPSHOT artifacts
> to
> >>>>> resolve for the plugin side of the test case
> >>>>
> >>>> The version of Maven you are running needs to be installed in the
> local
> >>>> repo you are running the ITs against, but I ran them all day yesterday
> >>>> without issue. I'll fetch and give it a whirl.
> >>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On 6 January 2014 12:51, Igor Fedorenko <ig...@ifedorenko.com> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> Stephen,
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I would prefer to keep the original test name, i.e.
> >>>>>> mng5530-mojo-execution-scope. Having both the JIRA issue id and
> short
> >>>>>> description of the test makes it much easier to understand what the
> >> test
> >>>>>> is supposed to do and still be able to find any additional
> information
> >>>>>> if needed.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Can you explain what problems you see with the original test name?
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=maven-integration-
> >>>>>> testing.git;a=commit;h=d4f4d4009d23a77254c20d4c2c8a2b8eccc91e47
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> --
> >>>>>> Regards,
> >>>>>> Igor
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
> >>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Thanks,
> >>>>
> >>>> Jason
> >>>>
> >>>> ----------------------------------------------------------
> >>>> Jason van Zyl
> >>>> Founder,  Apache Maven
> >>>> http://twitter.com/jvanzyl
> >>>> ---------------------------------------------------------
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >>
> >> Jason
> >>
> >> ----------------------------------------------------------
> >> Jason van Zyl
> >> Founder,  Apache Maven
> >> http://twitter.com/jvanzyl
> >> ---------------------------------------------------------
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Jason
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------
> Jason van Zyl
> Founder,  Apache Maven
> http://twitter.com/jvanzyl
> ---------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

Re: mng-5530 vs mng5530-mojo-execution-scope

Posted by Jason van Zyl <ja...@tesla.io>.
In this particular case once we release 3.2.0 then [3.2.0,) will be sufficient and not need to be changed.

On Jan 6, 2014, at 10:51 AM, Stephen Connolly <st...@gmail.com> wrote:

> I looked into that... the issue here is that the code does not promise to
> be able to give you a version of Maven, IOW there are some cases where the
> test harness will just give up and say "Oh the maven version is null
> because I can't figure it out... I'll ignore all skips now... good luck"...
> 
> Otherwise the way is to mage getMavenVersion() protected and then you can
> do verifier.setSystemProperty("foo",getMavenVersion()); and then use ${foo}
> and rely on it being expanded at run time from the system properties...
> nastyish but will work... we cannot use filtering as the target maven
> version is not available until the test suite starts running...
> 
> 
> On 6 January 2014 15:46, Jason van Zyl <ja...@tesla.io> wrote:
> 
>> We don't really have an easy way to specify an interim version that needs
>> to be tested. Once 3.2 is release it can be updated and locked down. If we
>> always want to test the version exercised by the ITs we'll have to figure
>> that out. Maybe as simple as exposing a property we can interpolate into
>> the POM.
>> 
>> On Jan 6, 2014, at 10:40 AM, Stephen Connolly <
>> stephen.alan.connolly@gmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>>> The issue was he had hard-coded 3.1.2-SNAPSHOT in the test resource. I
>>> changed that to [3.1.2-SNAPSHOT,) which gets 3.2.0-SNAPSHOT working for
>>> now... but is still hacky...
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On 6 January 2014 15:36, Jason van Zyl <ja...@tesla.io> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> On Jan 6, 2014, at 9:07 AM, Stephen Connolly <
>>>> stephen.alan.connolly@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> The test name was not the issue, though not keeping with the pattern
>> is,
>>>>> e.g. `mng-5530-blah-blah-blah` if you must but not
>>>> `mng5530-blah-blah-blah`
>>>>> as all the other tests start with `mng-` so they are sorted
>> consistently
>>>> 
>>>> Sure, that's a valid point. But I think the extra information is good. I
>>>> don't see anything wrong with mng-xxxx-short-description as a pattern.
>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> The real issue was that the test case itself broke when I switched the
>>>>> Maven version from 3.1.2-SNAPSHOT to 3.2.0-SNAPSHOT because the tests
>> run
>>>>> in a clean repository and there is thus no 3.1.2-SNAPSHOT artifacts to
>>>>> resolve for the plugin side of the test case
>>>> 
>>>> The version of Maven you are running needs to be installed in the local
>>>> repo you are running the ITs against, but I ran them all day yesterday
>>>> without issue. I'll fetch and give it a whirl.
>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> On 6 January 2014 12:51, Igor Fedorenko <ig...@ifedorenko.com> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> Stephen,
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> I would prefer to keep the original test name, i.e.
>>>>>> mng5530-mojo-execution-scope. Having both the JIRA issue id and short
>>>>>> description of the test makes it much easier to understand what the
>> test
>>>>>> is supposed to do and still be able to find any additional information
>>>>>> if needed.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Can you explain what problems you see with the original test name?
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=maven-integration-
>>>>>> testing.git;a=commit;h=d4f4d4009d23a77254c20d4c2c8a2b8eccc91e47
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>> Igor
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> 
>>>> Jason
>>>> 
>>>> ----------------------------------------------------------
>>>> Jason van Zyl
>>>> Founder,  Apache Maven
>>>> http://twitter.com/jvanzyl
>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> 
>> Jason
>> 
>> ----------------------------------------------------------
>> Jason van Zyl
>> Founder,  Apache Maven
>> http://twitter.com/jvanzyl
>> ---------------------------------------------------------
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 

Thanks,

Jason

----------------------------------------------------------
Jason van Zyl
Founder,  Apache Maven
http://twitter.com/jvanzyl
---------------------------------------------------------








Re: mng-5530 vs mng5530-mojo-execution-scope

Posted by Stephen Connolly <st...@gmail.com>.
I looked into that... the issue here is that the code does not promise to
be able to give you a version of Maven, IOW there are some cases where the
test harness will just give up and say "Oh the maven version is null
because I can't figure it out... I'll ignore all skips now... good luck"...

Otherwise the way is to mage getMavenVersion() protected and then you can
do verifier.setSystemProperty("foo",getMavenVersion()); and then use ${foo}
and rely on it being expanded at run time from the system properties...
nastyish but will work... we cannot use filtering as the target maven
version is not available until the test suite starts running...


On 6 January 2014 15:46, Jason van Zyl <ja...@tesla.io> wrote:

> We don't really have an easy way to specify an interim version that needs
> to be tested. Once 3.2 is release it can be updated and locked down. If we
> always want to test the version exercised by the ITs we'll have to figure
> that out. Maybe as simple as exposing a property we can interpolate into
> the POM.
>
> On Jan 6, 2014, at 10:40 AM, Stephen Connolly <
> stephen.alan.connolly@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > The issue was he had hard-coded 3.1.2-SNAPSHOT in the test resource. I
> > changed that to [3.1.2-SNAPSHOT,) which gets 3.2.0-SNAPSHOT working for
> > now... but is still hacky...
> >
> >
> > On 6 January 2014 15:36, Jason van Zyl <ja...@tesla.io> wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> On Jan 6, 2014, at 9:07 AM, Stephen Connolly <
> >> stephen.alan.connolly@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>> The test name was not the issue, though not keeping with the pattern
> is,
> >>> e.g. `mng-5530-blah-blah-blah` if you must but not
> >> `mng5530-blah-blah-blah`
> >>> as all the other tests start with `mng-` so they are sorted
> consistently
> >>
> >> Sure, that's a valid point. But I think the extra information is good. I
> >> don't see anything wrong with mng-xxxx-short-description as a pattern.
> >>
> >>>
> >>> The real issue was that the test case itself broke when I switched the
> >>> Maven version from 3.1.2-SNAPSHOT to 3.2.0-SNAPSHOT because the tests
> run
> >>> in a clean repository and there is thus no 3.1.2-SNAPSHOT artifacts to
> >>> resolve for the plugin side of the test case
> >>
> >> The version of Maven you are running needs to be installed in the local
> >> repo you are running the ITs against, but I ran them all day yesterday
> >> without issue. I'll fetch and give it a whirl.
> >>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On 6 January 2014 12:51, Igor Fedorenko <ig...@ifedorenko.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Stephen,
> >>>>
> >>>> I would prefer to keep the original test name, i.e.
> >>>> mng5530-mojo-execution-scope. Having both the JIRA issue id and short
> >>>> description of the test makes it much easier to understand what the
> test
> >>>> is supposed to do and still be able to find any additional information
> >>>> if needed.
> >>>>
> >>>> Can you explain what problems you see with the original test name?
> >>>>
> >>>> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=maven-integration-
> >>>> testing.git;a=commit;h=d4f4d4009d23a77254c20d4c2c8a2b8eccc91e47
> >>>>
> >>>> --
> >>>> Regards,
> >>>> Igor
> >>>>
> >>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
> >>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >>
> >> Jason
> >>
> >> ----------------------------------------------------------
> >> Jason van Zyl
> >> Founder,  Apache Maven
> >> http://twitter.com/jvanzyl
> >> ---------------------------------------------------------
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Jason
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------
> Jason van Zyl
> Founder,  Apache Maven
> http://twitter.com/jvanzyl
> ---------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

Re: mng-5530 vs mng5530-mojo-execution-scope

Posted by Jason van Zyl <ja...@tesla.io>.
We don't really have an easy way to specify an interim version that needs to be tested. Once 3.2 is release it can be updated and locked down. If we always want to test the version exercised by the ITs we'll have to figure that out. Maybe as simple as exposing a property we can interpolate into the POM.

On Jan 6, 2014, at 10:40 AM, Stephen Connolly <st...@gmail.com> wrote:

> The issue was he had hard-coded 3.1.2-SNAPSHOT in the test resource. I
> changed that to [3.1.2-SNAPSHOT,) which gets 3.2.0-SNAPSHOT working for
> now... but is still hacky...
> 
> 
> On 6 January 2014 15:36, Jason van Zyl <ja...@tesla.io> wrote:
> 
>> 
>> On Jan 6, 2014, at 9:07 AM, Stephen Connolly <
>> stephen.alan.connolly@gmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>>> The test name was not the issue, though not keeping with the pattern is,
>>> e.g. `mng-5530-blah-blah-blah` if you must but not
>> `mng5530-blah-blah-blah`
>>> as all the other tests start with `mng-` so they are sorted consistently
>> 
>> Sure, that's a valid point. But I think the extra information is good. I
>> don't see anything wrong with mng-xxxx-short-description as a pattern.
>> 
>>> 
>>> The real issue was that the test case itself broke when I switched the
>>> Maven version from 3.1.2-SNAPSHOT to 3.2.0-SNAPSHOT because the tests run
>>> in a clean repository and there is thus no 3.1.2-SNAPSHOT artifacts to
>>> resolve for the plugin side of the test case
>> 
>> The version of Maven you are running needs to be installed in the local
>> repo you are running the ITs against, but I ran them all day yesterday
>> without issue. I'll fetch and give it a whirl.
>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On 6 January 2014 12:51, Igor Fedorenko <ig...@ifedorenko.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> Stephen,
>>>> 
>>>> I would prefer to keep the original test name, i.e.
>>>> mng5530-mojo-execution-scope. Having both the JIRA issue id and short
>>>> description of the test makes it much easier to understand what the test
>>>> is supposed to do and still be able to find any additional information
>>>> if needed.
>>>> 
>>>> Can you explain what problems you see with the original test name?
>>>> 
>>>> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=maven-integration-
>>>> testing.git;a=commit;h=d4f4d4009d23a77254c20d4c2c8a2b8eccc91e47
>>>> 
>>>> --
>>>> Regards,
>>>> Igor
>>>> 
>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
>>>> 
>>>> 
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> 
>> Jason
>> 
>> ----------------------------------------------------------
>> Jason van Zyl
>> Founder,  Apache Maven
>> http://twitter.com/jvanzyl
>> ---------------------------------------------------------
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 

Thanks,

Jason

----------------------------------------------------------
Jason van Zyl
Founder,  Apache Maven
http://twitter.com/jvanzyl
---------------------------------------------------------








Re: mng-5530 vs mng5530-mojo-execution-scope

Posted by Stephen Connolly <st...@gmail.com>.
The issue was he had hard-coded 3.1.2-SNAPSHOT in the test resource. I
changed that to [3.1.2-SNAPSHOT,) which gets 3.2.0-SNAPSHOT working for
now... but is still hacky...


On 6 January 2014 15:36, Jason van Zyl <ja...@tesla.io> wrote:

>
> On Jan 6, 2014, at 9:07 AM, Stephen Connolly <
> stephen.alan.connolly@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > The test name was not the issue, though not keeping with the pattern is,
> > e.g. `mng-5530-blah-blah-blah` if you must but not
> `mng5530-blah-blah-blah`
> > as all the other tests start with `mng-` so they are sorted consistently
>
> Sure, that's a valid point. But I think the extra information is good. I
> don't see anything wrong with mng-xxxx-short-description as a pattern.
>
> >
> > The real issue was that the test case itself broke when I switched the
> > Maven version from 3.1.2-SNAPSHOT to 3.2.0-SNAPSHOT because the tests run
> > in a clean repository and there is thus no 3.1.2-SNAPSHOT artifacts to
> > resolve for the plugin side of the test case
>
> The version of Maven you are running needs to be installed in the local
> repo you are running the ITs against, but I ran them all day yesterday
> without issue. I'll fetch and give it a whirl.
>
> >
> >
> > On 6 January 2014 12:51, Igor Fedorenko <ig...@ifedorenko.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Stephen,
> >>
> >> I would prefer to keep the original test name, i.e.
> >> mng5530-mojo-execution-scope. Having both the JIRA issue id and short
> >> description of the test makes it much easier to understand what the test
> >> is supposed to do and still be able to find any additional information
> >> if needed.
> >>
> >> Can you explain what problems you see with the original test name?
> >>
> >> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=maven-integration-
> >> testing.git;a=commit;h=d4f4d4009d23a77254c20d4c2c8a2b8eccc91e47
> >>
> >> --
> >> Regards,
> >> Igor
> >>
> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
> >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
> >>
> >>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Jason
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------
> Jason van Zyl
> Founder,  Apache Maven
> http://twitter.com/jvanzyl
> ---------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

Re: mng-5530 vs mng5530-mojo-execution-scope

Posted by Jason van Zyl <ja...@tesla.io>.
On Jan 6, 2014, at 9:07 AM, Stephen Connolly <st...@gmail.com> wrote:

> The test name was not the issue, though not keeping with the pattern is,
> e.g. `mng-5530-blah-blah-blah` if you must but not `mng5530-blah-blah-blah`
> as all the other tests start with `mng-` so they are sorted consistently

Sure, that's a valid point. But I think the extra information is good. I don't see anything wrong with mng-xxxx-short-description as a pattern.

> 
> The real issue was that the test case itself broke when I switched the
> Maven version from 3.1.2-SNAPSHOT to 3.2.0-SNAPSHOT because the tests run
> in a clean repository and there is thus no 3.1.2-SNAPSHOT artifacts to
> resolve for the plugin side of the test case

The version of Maven you are running needs to be installed in the local repo you are running the ITs against, but I ran them all day yesterday without issue. I'll fetch and give it a whirl.

> 
> 
> On 6 January 2014 12:51, Igor Fedorenko <ig...@ifedorenko.com> wrote:
> 
>> Stephen,
>> 
>> I would prefer to keep the original test name, i.e.
>> mng5530-mojo-execution-scope. Having both the JIRA issue id and short
>> description of the test makes it much easier to understand what the test
>> is supposed to do and still be able to find any additional information
>> if needed.
>> 
>> Can you explain what problems you see with the original test name?
>> 
>> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=maven-integration-
>> testing.git;a=commit;h=d4f4d4009d23a77254c20d4c2c8a2b8eccc91e47
>> 
>> --
>> Regards,
>> Igor
>> 
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
>> 
>> 

Thanks,

Jason

----------------------------------------------------------
Jason van Zyl
Founder,  Apache Maven
http://twitter.com/jvanzyl
---------------------------------------------------------








Re: mng-5530 vs mng5530-mojo-execution-scope

Posted by Stephen Connolly <st...@gmail.com>.
The test name was not the issue, though not keeping with the pattern is,
e.g. `mng-5530-blah-blah-blah` if you must but not `mng5530-blah-blah-blah`
as all the other tests start with `mng-` so they are sorted consistently

The real issue was that the test case itself broke when I switched the
Maven version from 3.1.2-SNAPSHOT to 3.2.0-SNAPSHOT because the tests run
in a clean repository and there is thus no 3.1.2-SNAPSHOT artifacts to
resolve for the plugin side of the test case


On 6 January 2014 12:51, Igor Fedorenko <ig...@ifedorenko.com> wrote:

> Stephen,
>
> I would prefer to keep the original test name, i.e.
> mng5530-mojo-execution-scope. Having both the JIRA issue id and short
> description of the test makes it much easier to understand what the test
> is supposed to do and still be able to find any additional information
> if needed.
>
> Can you explain what problems you see with the original test name?
>
> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=maven-integration-
> testing.git;a=commit;h=d4f4d4009d23a77254c20d4c2c8a2b8eccc91e47
>
> --
> Regards,
> Igor
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
>
>

Re: mng-5530 vs mng5530-mojo-execution-scope

Posted by Jason van Zyl <ja...@tesla.io>.
Yup, I agree.

On Jan 6, 2014, at 10:39 AM, Stephen Connolly <st...@gmail.com> wrote:

> yes but keep the dash between the mng and the mng number
> 
> 
> On 6 January 2014 15:24, Jason van Zyl <ja...@tesla.io> wrote:
> 
>> +1 On the original name
>> 
>> I just made another IT and it's definitely much clearer with the JIRA id
>> and a short blurb. I see this as an improvement.
>> 
>> On Jan 6, 2014, at 7:51 AM, Igor Fedorenko <ig...@ifedorenko.com> wrote:
>> 
>>> Stephen,
>>> 
>>> I would prefer to keep the original test name, i.e.
>>> mng5530-mojo-execution-scope. Having both the JIRA issue id and short
>>> description of the test makes it much easier to understand what the test
>>> is supposed to do and still be able to find any additional information
>>> if needed.
>>> 
>>> Can you explain what problems you see with the original test name?
>>> 
>>> 
>> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=maven-integration-testing.git;a=commit;h=d4f4d4009d23a77254c20d4c2c8a2b8eccc91e47
>>> 
>>> --
>>> Regards,
>>> Igor
>>> 
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
>>> 
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> 
>> Jason
>> 
>> ----------------------------------------------------------
>> Jason van Zyl
>> Founder,  Apache Maven
>> http://twitter.com/jvanzyl
>> ---------------------------------------------------------
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 

Thanks,

Jason

----------------------------------------------------------
Jason van Zyl
Founder,  Apache Maven
http://twitter.com/jvanzyl
---------------------------------------------------------








Re: mng-5530 vs mng5530-mojo-execution-scope

Posted by Stephen Connolly <st...@gmail.com>.
yes but keep the dash between the mng and the mng number


On 6 January 2014 15:24, Jason van Zyl <ja...@tesla.io> wrote:

> +1 On the original name
>
> I just made another IT and it's definitely much clearer with the JIRA id
> and a short blurb. I see this as an improvement.
>
> On Jan 6, 2014, at 7:51 AM, Igor Fedorenko <ig...@ifedorenko.com> wrote:
>
> > Stephen,
> >
> > I would prefer to keep the original test name, i.e.
> > mng5530-mojo-execution-scope. Having both the JIRA issue id and short
> > description of the test makes it much easier to understand what the test
> > is supposed to do and still be able to find any additional information
> > if needed.
> >
> > Can you explain what problems you see with the original test name?
> >
> >
> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=maven-integration-testing.git;a=commit;h=d4f4d4009d23a77254c20d4c2c8a2b8eccc91e47
> >
> > --
> > Regards,
> > Igor
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
> >
>
> Thanks,
>
> Jason
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------
> Jason van Zyl
> Founder,  Apache Maven
> http://twitter.com/jvanzyl
> ---------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

Re: mng-5530 vs mng5530-mojo-execution-scope

Posted by Jason van Zyl <ja...@tesla.io>.
+1 On the original name

I just made another IT and it's definitely much clearer with the JIRA id and a short blurb. I see this as an improvement.

On Jan 6, 2014, at 7:51 AM, Igor Fedorenko <ig...@ifedorenko.com> wrote:

> Stephen,
> 
> I would prefer to keep the original test name, i.e.
> mng5530-mojo-execution-scope. Having both the JIRA issue id and short
> description of the test makes it much easier to understand what the test
> is supposed to do and still be able to find any additional information
> if needed.
> 
> Can you explain what problems you see with the original test name?
> 
> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=maven-integration-testing.git;a=commit;h=d4f4d4009d23a77254c20d4c2c8a2b8eccc91e47
> 
> --
> Regards,
> Igor
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
> 

Thanks,

Jason

----------------------------------------------------------
Jason van Zyl
Founder,  Apache Maven
http://twitter.com/jvanzyl
---------------------------------------------------------