incubator-jspwiki-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Florian Holeczek <>
Subject Re: code coverage and sonar integration
Date Wed, 27 Jun 2012 09:33:56 GMT
Hi Juan Pablo and Janne,

improving our build management is something I've had in mind for a long time already. Just
having a look at the output of some Ant visualization tool is demonstrating that there is
much room for improvement :-)
I remember a discussion with Janne on this. He wasn't really in favour of Maven, and, after
I've personally seen some not that huge project suffering from Maven's complexity, I tend
to share his opinion.
IMO, JSPWiki has definitely grown too big for Ant, but it's ways too small for Maven. I think
Ivy might be a small partial improvement regarding dependency management, but the most promising
candidate to me is Gradle [1].
Heard of it already? WDYT?



----- Ursprüngliche Mail -----
Von: "Juan Pablo Santos Rodríguez" <>
Gesendet: Mittwoch, 27. Juni 2012 10:49:37
Betreff: Re: code coverage and sonar integration

hmmm.., then I'd rather go adding Ivy support to manage all dependencies
(or even to a maven-based build). Will begin on this as soon as I can. Thx
for the info on this :-)


On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 9:18 AM, Janne Jalkanen <>wrote:

> Nope.
> But what you can do is to make an ant task which downloads Cobertura and
> the relevant JARs when you run "ant coverage-tests" or whatever.
> /Janne
> On 27 Jun 2012, at 01:11, Juan Pablo Santos Rodríguez wrote:
> > Hi again,
> >
> > I was curious and have added the needed jars and the related ant task to
> > see how JSPWiki is performing in terms of test coverage. I was about to
> > commit the changes, but I'm not very sure if we can commit the Cobertura
> > jar, as it is not clear to me if their license is AL-compatible or not
> (by
> > the way, if anybody is curious, I've uploaded the reports to [1]).
> >
> > Cobertura ant tasks are AL-licensed [2], but cobertura.jar contains both
> > ant-tasks and Cobertura itself, which is GPL. Is it OK to commit this jar
> > in tests/lib? Regarding asm-3.0.jar and asm-tree-3.0.jar, they seem OK
> [3].
> >
> > Also, following up with the coverage reports, I've also made the
> appropiate
> > task to let Sonar gather some statistics from JSPWiki. The point is,
> Sonar
> > is LGPL'ed, which means we can't add the Sonar ant tasks to the project,
> > so, does it make sense to commit these build.xml changes? As I have them
> > now, they assume that the Sonar ant tasks are placed inside $ANT_HOME/lib
> >
> >
> > regards,
> > juan pablo
> >
> >
> > [1]:
> > [2]:
> > [3]:

View raw message