From dev-return-14524-apmail-directory-dev-archive=directory.apache.org@directory.apache.org Sun Dec 03 22:58:03 2006 Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-directory-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 85900 invoked from network); 3 Dec 2006 22:58:02 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.2) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 3 Dec 2006 22:58:02 -0000 Received: (qmail 839 invoked by uid 500); 3 Dec 2006 22:58:11 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-directory-dev-archive@directory.apache.org Received: (qmail 618 invoked by uid 500); 3 Dec 2006 22:58:10 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@directory.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: "Apache Directory Developers List" Delivered-To: mailing list dev@directory.apache.org Received: (qmail 603 invoked by uid 99); 3 Dec 2006 22:58:10 -0000 Received: from herse.apache.org (HELO herse.apache.org) (140.211.11.133) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Sun, 03 Dec 2006 14:58:10 -0800 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=2.8 required=10.0 tests=DNS_FROM_RFC_ABUSE,DNS_FROM_RFC_POST,DNS_FROM_RFC_WHOIS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (herse.apache.org: local policy) Received: from [209.73.178.211] (HELO web60723.mail.yahoo.com) (209.73.178.211) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with SMTP; Sun, 03 Dec 2006 14:57:57 -0800 Received: (qmail 1607 invoked by uid 60001); 3 Dec 2006 22:57:36 -0000 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; h=X-YMail-OSG:Received:Date:From:Subject:To:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Message-ID; b=j6YmI+T8nQ/C4RPbcPOYN3sQeDkdvkO2CXiPs+PVEK2jTEtAjCLJvKuO9BBopaXn+u+zD7nXn7CjbN3dSwjnneHyLmPoLvmh0rt36W+MeMsE2Mhn/w42Jp8yc098fR4cv/ZF/XDMNZJhaOf8eEbjtXCQLzyYMc2KRWWb4yqJqlE=; X-YMail-OSG: PJf_aiIVM1kEkvwNTPg3W2wB8hSyyoyrK9OdqT0fcpNFBKRrGkpwhFZ_jBCvbgSP1dpWmnJRs9Aan0C9kl_DhrN95n_8O13Sy_j6uLKOD0g4S9wW2Ftt2yibCvJJRmwLUkal15V0VtPZYqFV_Gzeu4J_RGay2Htqtpwds_o0lHTKo97E8QiAMiqWrZNf0g-- Received: from [24.13.179.233] by web60723.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Sun, 03 Dec 2006 14:57:36 PST Date: Sun, 3 Dec 2006 14:57:36 -0800 (PST) From: Ole Ersoy Subject: Re: Comments on Emmanuel's Maven Testing Thoughts To: Apache Directory Developers List , elecharny@apache.org In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Message-ID: <351099.1253.qm@web60723.mail.yahoo.com> X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org OH - With respect to putting tests in projects with packaging set to pom. Here's my thinking on this (Which is probably the same as yours, I'll just elaborate for sake of clarity). Projects with packaging pom should be for configuration management only. All code (src/main/test and src/main/java) should be in child projects with packaging set to anything but pom. I would think that maven would ignore code in pom packaged projects...but I have not tested it. --- Emmanuel Lecharny wrote: > On 12/3/06, Ole Ersoy wrote: > > > > Emmanuel, > > > > I thought about your scenario a little more. > > > > Here's your scenario: > > > > ----------------------------------------- > > Level0 -> L2 -> L3 > > > > with a test in each level, and each test depends > on > > a very specific version > > ----------------------------------------- > > > > This is where I hung for a sec. > > >with a test in each level, and each test depends > on > > >a very specific version. > > > > Then I thought about it like this: > > > > Challenge > > > > We have L0 project > > with a dependency in dependencyManagement > > that has a version 2.1.1. > > > correct > > A project A at L1 uses this dependency. > > > correct, so no need to declare the version, just > declare the dependency in > L1 pom.xml > > Project B at L1 overrides this dependency > > and sets the version to 3.2. > > > Ok, so you must declare the dependency AND the > version in B pom.xml > > Project C is a parent project and it > > has two child projects, D and F. > > > I guess that you don't declare a dependencyManagment > in C pom.xml file > > Project D needs version 3.3 of the > > dependency. Project F does not > > want the dependency at all. > > > > Solution > > > > Project D just overrides and puts in > > version 3.3 like project B did. > > > Correct. And if project F is nut using the > dependency, then you don't > declare it in its pom.xml. > > I assume you meant something like this? > > > more or less > > I also assume that there are no tests in projects > > with packaging of type pom? > > > Not usre I understand the question > > If that's the case, then I think we should be fine. > > > > Have you had any issues with this type of > structure? > > > I just try to figure out which structure works, in > any case, and which is > not, and if there are some workaround. This is > obviously a necessary task, > as, for instance, the eclipse plugin is not able to > cope with this simple > needs. > > Thanks, > > - Ole > > > Thanks ! > Emmanuel > ____________________________________________________________________________________ Need a quick answer? Get one in minutes from people who know. Ask your question on www.Answers.yahoo.com