incubator-empire-db-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Rainer Döbele <doeb...@esteam.de>
Subject re: ready for release?
Date Wed, 17 Jun 2009 20:37:54 GMT
Hi Francis,

In this case I suggest setting the level to FATAL and close this isssue.

Another question: In our readme.txt the build instructions are:
>
> === Eclipse ===
>  
>  - Install the m2eclipse plugin and import the projects directly
>    http://m2eclipse.codehaus.org/
>    In eclipse: Import... Maven projects
>  
>  - Run 'mvn clean install eclipse:eclipse -DdownloadSources=true' 
>    In eclipse: Import... Existing projects into workspace

Sounds a bit complicated to me.
Is it OK if we change it to something like:
> 
> === Eclipse ===
>
>  Change to src directory of Apache Empire-db distribution
>  and run 
>	$ mvn install eclipse:eclipse
>

First of all I don't think the description for the m2eclipse plugin is accurate and second
do we really need to specify options like "-DdownloadSources=true"?
I can't tell whether or not the instructions for NetBeans are sufficient.

BTW: In the Apache CXF distribution the pom is in the root directory and all you need to do
is call mvn from the command line. There is no need to specify a goal. Would that be possible
or desirable for us too?

Regards
Rainer

P.S. I will be on a business trip with limited access to E-Mail the next couple of days. So
don't expect immediate answers.

Rainer

Francis De Brabandere wrote:
> Re: ready for release?
> 
> 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.

Mime
View raw message