Mailing-List: contact dev-help@ant.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: "Ant Developers List" <dev@ant.apache.org>
Received-SPF: neutral (hermes.apache.org: local policy)
In-Reply-To: <4283322F.5040705@javactivity.org>
To: "Ant Developers List" <dev@ant.apache.org>
Subject: Re: AW: [patch] FTP.java - adding support for new features in     com
	mons-net 1.4.0 and performance improvement
MIME-Version: 1.0
From: sissonj@insession.com
Message-ID: 
 <OFF5BA1E4D.4C3405D4-ONCA256FFF.003E6A1D-CA256FFF.003ECCD6@tsainc.com>
Date: Thu, 12 May 2005 22:25:56 +1100
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
 boundary="=_alternative 003ECAE3CA256FFF_="

--=_alternative 003ECAE3CA256FFF_=
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"

Any chance one of you guys could also incorporate my simple patch to the 
FTP task that adds the "initialcommand" attribute? 

http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34853

Thanks,

John

This e-mail message and any attachments may contain confidential, 
proprietary or non-public information.  This information is intended 
solely for the designated recipient(s).  If an addressing or transmission 
error has misdirected this e-mail, please notify the sender immediately 
and destroy this e-mail.  Any review, dissemination, use or reliance upon 
this information by unintended recipients is prohibited.  Any opinions 
expressed in this e-mail are those of the author personally.

Steve Cohen <scohen@javactivity.org> wrote on 12/05/2005 08:38:39 PM:

> Antoine Levy-Lambert wrote:
> > Steve Cohen wrote:
> > 
> >>
> >> However, it does seem to me that this test case is rather incomplete, 

> >> and could be beefed up in several ways to test these and other recent 

> >> features of commons-net which are not being tested here.
> >>
> > Feel free to expand this test. I created this test to check that the 
> > pattern selection features of the ftp task work, when I refactored it.
> 
> Makes sense, I suppose.  You would presume that commons-net has its own 
> tests (indeed it does) and therefore only test the interaction with Ant.
> 
> > 
> >> I guess what I am asking is what the scope of these tests is.  Who 
> >> runs them, when, and how?  (Do they change the password as I had 
to?).
> >>
> > I believe almost no one runs these tests, except committers who are 
> > changing the ftp task. To make this test work in gump, there would be 
> > the need to install on the gump machine a standard ftp server used to 
> > run the tests.
> 
> In commons-net we have tests that ARE part of gump and can be run 
> anywhere and then we have tests that are NOT part of gump (we call them 
> functional tests) since they depend on various ftp servers over which we 

> have no control.  These tests are only run manually, although they 
> should pass, assuming the server is up, from anywhere, without 
> modification or -D definition.  (they use anonymous FTP).  Do you think 
> it would make sense to add such tests here?  Or should I just be testing 

> that the new attributes are accepted by Ant properly?
> 
> I am eager to test the time zone feature in Ant, which virtually 
> requires an external ftp server and could be very useful in Ant.  The 
> other new features, concerning languages other than English, etc., are, 
> in my experience harder to test because there are so few servers that 
> work that way anymore.  Almost all the publicly accessible ftp servers 
> have converted to English month names.  I know because I looked all over 

> the place and could find not a single one that didn't!  I presume that 
> the non-English server complaints we occasionally hear about concern 
> various private intra-company servers that use older ftp servers.  If it 

> ain't broke, don't fix it.  Apparently older ftp servers actually called 

> "ls" and the newer ones don't.  This will become even more moot as 
> all-numeric timestamps become more prevalent in unix ftp servers - I 
> recently learned that Debian is now shipping this way and hope this a 
> wave of the future.
> 
> 
> > 
> >> I've also committed install.html to indicate that from here forward, 
> >> commons.net >= 1.4.0 is required.
> >>
> > If commons.net 1.4.0 is required, is it not a big constraing for the 
> > 1.6.4 release ?
> 
> Indeed.  I was proceeding on Stefan's instructions to put it into the 
> HEAD and have a vote later about adding them to 1.6.4.  If the Ant team 
> does not feel confident about requiring 1.4.0 so soon this vote will 
fail.
> > 
> >> I am working on revised manual page for the ftp task which has 
> >> optional new attributes but I want to tweak that a bit more.
> >>
> >>
> > +1
> > Antoine
> > 
> Steve
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@ant.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@ant.apache.org
> 

--=_alternative 003ECAE3CA256FFF_=--