incubator-empire-db-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Francis De Brabandere <franci...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: ready for release?
Date Thu, 18 Jun 2009 22:42:35 GMT
Ok that building.txt is kind of like our readme
we also need some release task list and I need to look into releasing
using meven on the apache infrastructure. I know they have a staging
repository but I'm not sure incubator projects can use it.

Would it be hard to have a wiki set up for our project? Or is that
planned for after incubation?

On Wed, Jun 17, 2009 at 8:11 PM, Francis De
Brabandere<francisdb@gmail.com> wrote:
> Concerning the release there might be a difference for incubator
> projects but I'll have a look at it tomorrow.
>
> As for the logging I don't care that the build logs a lot but it's not
> that I'm against hiding the logging either
>
> Francis
>
> On Wed, Jun 17, 2009 at 4:23 PM, Rainer Döbele<doebele@esteam.de> wrote:
>> Hi Francis,
>>
>> well I did it myself on my machine and I was just thinking about it.
>> My personal opinion is, that I don't need log output from tests for every build -
all I need to know is whether any of the tests failed at all. If so, I can investigate on
this specific test.
>> But it's a personal opinion.
>> Write the log output to a file sounds like a good idea to me too.
>>
>> The next question is: Do we now put it up for voting or not.
>> Is there anything else we can or must supply.
>>
>> Apache CXF has a nice document called "BUILDING.txt" that explains how to build with
Maven.
>> We could adapt this for our release.
>>
>> @Jörg are you still reading this. What's your opinion?
>>
>> Regards
>> Rainer
>>
>> Francis De Brabandere wrote:
>>> Re: logging of unit tests
>>>
>>> So I set the level to FATAL and put those parse warnings back to error
>>> then? Should I convert the log4j settings to xml format?
>>>
>>> But if you are not interested in them maybe we can just log to a file
>>> in the target folder instead of console?
>>>
>>> On Wed, Jun 17, 2009 at 10:19 AM, Rainer Döbele<doebele@esteam.de>
>>> wrote:
>>> > Hi Francis,
>>> >
>>> > thanks a lot.
>>> > Now I can see where the properties for log4j are set.
>>> > I didn't think about looking in src/test/resources - but its logical.
>>> > Usually we use an embedded xml configuration instead of a properties
>>> file.
>>> >
>>> > The output is much better, however I would even consider setting the
>>> debug level to FATAL instead of WARN.
>>> > The overall result is measured anyway and there is IMO not much
>>> benefit in having the log output there.
>>> > What do you think?
>>> >
>>> > Regards
>>> > Rainer
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > Francis De Brabandere wrote:
>>> >> Re: revive the release process
>>> >>
>>> >> Changed those errors to warnings for logging since a default value
>>> is
>>> >> provided these are no real exceptions.
>>> >> Also set the unit test default log level to WARN
>>> >>
>>> >> Let me know if this is ok, we could also keep them at error level
>>> and
>>> >> not provide the stack trace. I don't know of an option in log4j to
>>> >> hide the traces
>>> >>
>>> >> What do you think?
>>> >>
>>> >> On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 5:08 PM, Francis De
>>> >> Brabandere<francisdb@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >> > Hi Rainer,
>>> >> >
>>> >> > I'll have a look at the logging this evening.
>>> >> >
>>> >> > On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 5:03 PM, Rainer Döbele<doebele@esteam.de>
>>> >> wrote:
>>> >> >> Hi Francis (and everyone interested),
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> after it has been very quiet on the dev-mailing list recently,
I
>>> >> would like to revive the release process of empire-db 2.0.5 in order
>>> to
>>> >> be able to go ahead with some possibly bigger changes.
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> The current assembly builds well and I as far as I can tell
all
>>> >> required legal documents are there.
>>> >> >> However, there is one thing that annoys me:
>>> >> >> The JUnit test-code produces very verbose output - including
some
>>> >> exceptions.
>>> >> >> Those exceptions are intended and handled properly - but are
>>> >> confusing.
>>> >> >> @Francis: is there a way of disabling log output when running
the
>>> >> unit tests?
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> Apart from that the assembly is fine to me.
>>> >> >> Anyone else to comment the assembly before we put it up for
>>> voting?
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> Regards
>>> >> >> Rainer
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >
>>> >> >
>>> >> >
>>> >> > --
>>> >> > http://www.somatik.be
>>> >> > Microsoft gives you windows, Linux gives you the whole house.
>>> >> >
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> --
>>> >> http://www.somatik.be
>>> >> Microsoft gives you windows, Linux gives you the whole house.
>>> >
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> http://www.somatik.be
>>> Microsoft gives you windows, Linux gives you the whole house.
>>
>
>
>
> --
> http://www.somatik.be
> Microsoft gives you windows, Linux gives you the whole house.
>



-- 
http://www.somatik.be
Microsoft gives you windows, Linux gives you the whole house.

Mime
View raw message