Mailing-List: contact dev-help@ant.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: "Ant Developers List" <dev@ant.apache.org>
Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of David.Jackman@fastsearch.com
 designates 69.38.159.24 as permitted sender)
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C83E6E.08D50470"
Subject: [AntUnit] Getting log output (and maybe more) from AntUnit
Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2007 09:26:08 -0700
Message-ID: <5CD37B6E090454489C5FC15B9B4B5B19383B2C@slces02.ad.fast.no>
Thread-Topic: [AntUnit] Getting log output (and maybe more) from AntUnit
Thread-Index: Acg+bgho2OVPAGh9S0ikweHorT/rLA==
From: "David Jackman" <David.Jackman@fastsearch.com>
To: <dev@ant.apache.org>

------_=_NextPart_001_01C83E6E.08D50470
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

This email is to start the discussion requested by Stefan in his comment
to bug 43582:

I don't really want to modify the AntUnitListener interface, but I can
understand if we want to include it in the generated reports (since
<junit> does

so) on the other hand.  Before we go into patch details, can we go back
to the dev list and agree on where we want the feature to go?

=20

I would also prefer not changing the interface, but I'm not seeing a
better solution that works well.  Especially when I think of other
things I'd like to have in my AntUnit reports:

*         Project description=20

*         Test target descriptions

*         Info on test targets that were skipped because of if/unless
tags

=20

Maybe the thing to do is create a second listener interface that is
richer.  AntUnit could accept listeners that implement either interface.
This way existing listeners written to the original interface aren't
broken but new listeners can still be written that can take advantage of
the enhanced information.

=20

..David..

=20


------_=_NextPart_001_01C83E6E.08D50470--