commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Henri Yandell" <flame...@gmail.com>
Subject End of vote Was: [VOTE] Lang 2.3 RC1
Date Tue, 06 Feb 2007 23:30:14 GMT
2.3-RC2 vote kicked off, so this vote is dead.

* The unit test below was changed to a warning.
* The proposal.html is no longer in the source.
* The sources.jar and javadoc.jar are in the binary.
* A couple of JIRA issues are dealt with.

Hen

On 2/1/07, Jörg Schaible <joerg.schaible@gmx.de> wrote:
> Correction: Tests did *not* run:
>
> ========= %< ============
> $ ant
> ...
>     [junit] Tests run: 224, Failures: 0, Errors: 0, Time elapsed: 0,11 sec
>
> test.time:
>     [junit] Running org.apache.commons.lang.time.TimeTestSuite
>     [junit] Tests run: 61, Failures: 1, Errors: 0, Time elapsed: 8,094 sec
>     [junit] Test org.apache.commons.lang.time.TimeTestSuite FAILED
>
> test:
>      [echo] Running tests ...
>
> BUILD SUCCESSFUL
> ========= %< ============
>
> Building with M1 fails therefore. Test report:
>
> ========= %< ============
> Testsuite: org.apache.commons.lang.time.TimeTestSuite
> Tests run: 61, Failures: 1, Errors: 0, Time elapsed: 8,938 sec
>
> Testcase: testLang312(org.apache.commons.lang.time.DateFormatUtilsTest):
> FAILED
> expected:<...9...> but was:<...8...>
> junit.framework.ComparisonFailure: expected:<...9...> but was:<...8...>
>         at org.apache.commons.lang.time.DateFormatUtilsTest.testLang31
> (DateFormatUtilsTest.java:230)
>         at sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke0(Native Method)
>         at
> sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(NativeMethodAccessorImpl.java:39)
>         at
> sun.reflect.DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.java:25)
> ========= %< ============
>
> It's the part of the fixture that tests the JDK ... maybe this should not be
> asserted and better be replaced by a simple sysout? In the end you cannot
> know what was changed/fixed by Sun in which JDK version (and if the
> assumption is valid for other JDKs) and it does not make sense to rely our
> tests on such a behavior.
>
> - Jörg
>
>
> Jörg Schaible wrote:
>
> > +1
> >
> > Rebuild from the src package with Sun JDK 5 under Linux.
> >
> > Minor: I understand that the proposal is a historical document, but it
> > claims that c-lang is build on top of JDK 1.2 ... that might be confusing.
> >
> > - Jörg
> >
> >
> > Henri Yandell wrote:
> >
> >> Next up - Lang 2.3.
> >>
> >> Here's the release candidate:
> >>
> >> http://people.apache.org/~bayard/commons-lang/commons-lang-2.3-rc1/
> >>
> >> Clirr, Jardiff + Site included.
> >>
> >> [ ] +1
> >> [ ] -1
> >>
> >> Vote to close on Monday if it gets that far.
> >>
> >> There is an open issue in JIRA currently:
> >>
> >> http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LANG-69
> >>
> >> I'm keeping it open for a little bit longer in case anyone has any
> >> opinions on my fix to this.
> >>
> >> Hen
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
>
>

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


Mime
View raw message