commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Rahul Akolkar <rahul.akol...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [Digester] working toward a release
Date Tue, 31 Aug 2010 21:54:35 GMT
On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 2:45 PM, Simone Tripodi
<simone.tripodi@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi guys,
> one more question: what about keeping or removing the Test
> classes/methods that just declare the Suite? AFAIK are not more
> needed...
<snip/>

Don't have a strong opinion -- if someone wants to do it.

-Rahul


> Thanks in advance,
> Simo
>
> http://people.apache.org/~simonetripodi/
> http://www.99soft.org/
>
>
>
> On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 8:29 PM, Simone Tripodi
> <simone.tripodi@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hi Seb,
>> thanks for your feedbacks, always appreciated! I know and understand
>> the need of having the package.html files, but what do you think about
>> replacing them with the package-info.java files? It should be the
>> same, or not? I've been working with them and found it very
>> comfortables.
>> I'll start staking care of migrating the JUnit dependency, is it fine
>> for you just adding the @Test annotation on existing methods, without
>> renaming them? The number of tests is quite large... :P
>> Thanks in advance, have a nice day,
>> Simo
>>
>> http://people.apache.org/~simonetripodi/
>> http://www.99soft.org/
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 6:09 PM, sebb <sebbaz@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On 31 August 2010 17:02, sebb <sebbaz@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On 31 August 2010 14:39, Simone Tripodi <simone.tripodi@gmail.com>
wrote:
>>>>> Hi Rahul,
>>>>> I just added the xdoc version of the documentation present in the
>>>>> package.html files.
>>>>
>>>> The package.html files are normally used to annotate the Javadoc output.
>>>>
>>>> However in this case these files have got a lot more content than is
>>>> normally present in the Javadoc.
>>>>
>>>>> Do you think these last can be removed, since
>>>>> would be redundant with the new developers guide?
>>>>
>>>> There should at least be minimal package.html files for Javadoc usage,
>>>> so I don't think the files should be removed entirely, but they could
>>>> be replaced with much simpler versions.
>>>>
>>>>> At this stage, we
>>>>> should maintain two different data sources with same information, I'd
>>>>> propose to drop the existing one, but let choose together.
>>>>> Another small question: in src/conf there is a MANIFEST.MF[1] file
>>>>> that contains informations that maven can generate automatically, do
>>>>> you think we can drop it, when dropping the ant build?
>>>>
>>>> +1 to dropping MANIFEST.MF.
>>>>
>>>>> Thanks in advance, have a nice day!
>>>>> Simo
>>>>>
>>>>> [1] https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/commons/proper/digester/trunk/src/conf/MANIFEST.MF
>>>>>
>>>
>>> Forgot to add - could update JUnit to the latest 4.x release, i.e. 4.8.1

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


Mime
View raw message