gump-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Bill Barker" <>
Subject [VOTE] Resolving JUnit failures
Date Sat, 18 Feb 2006 03:33:15 GMT

<> wrote in message 
>CLASSPATH :/opt/jdk1.4/lib/tools.jar ...
>    [javac] Compiling 139 source files to /x1/gump/public/workspace/junit
>    [javac] 
> /x1/gump/public/workspace/junit/junit/extensions/ 
>  ><identifier> expected
>    [javac] public ActiveTestSuite(Class<? extends TestCase> theClass) {
>It seems that JUnit needs Java5, but got only a 1.4...

Yup.  It seems like our options are:
1) Change vmgump to run with Java 5, and hope that the ~50% coverage we got 
last time has been fixed by their respective projects (it's been awhile, so 
who knows :).
2) Change the 196 projects that <depend /> on JUnit to used packaged-junit 
3) Change JUnit to build from a branch (not as bad as 2, but still not what 
Gump is about)
4) Just hope that the JUnit project comes to their senses, and restores JVM 
1.4 compatibility (not likely, given how extensive the change seems to be).

If it wasn't for the fact that most projects that adopt Java 5 also seem to 
soon after move to exclusively requiring Maven2, I'd vote 1) (e.g. mina). 
If JUnit plans to do that as well, we might as well do 2) or 3), since Gump 
support for Maven2 seems a long way off :(.

And, actually, the inclusion of the [VOTE] is more in the hopes of getting 
people to actually read this.  So, if anybody has any better ideas to 
resolve this, just add them to the list, and they will be counted.  Also, 
since this is mostly metadata, I'm considering all votes from ASF committers 
binding (although, as always, the Gump PMC could choose to override this :). 
And, needless to be said, I'm volunteering for any grunt-work that needs to 
be done to implement it (please vote 1 or 4 :).


To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message