lucene-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Andreas Guther" <andreas.gut...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Tests, Contribs, and Releases
Date Fri, 18 May 2007 05:15:12 GMT
Hi,

Maven 2 provides a well defined and excellent build process.  If the code
basis is organized according to the Maven default project layout Maven can
do amazing things without almost no configuration.

The documentation is improved and there is a free PDF document available:

http://www.mergere.com/m2book_download.jsp

I am using Maven 2 now for almost 18 months with excellent results.  The
learning curve is a little bit steep but it is worth the effort.  Before
that I was using Maven 1 for two years and I happily switched to it from Ant
which I started to use in 2000.  Ant is very powerful but what really
attracts me to Maven is the paradigm convention over configuration and the
powerful dependency management.

Maven per default tries to locate unit tests and executes them as part of
the build process.  It will fail if unit tests fail (unless otherwise
configured).  I think that a release cannot happen if builds fail.  If a
contribution fails with its unit tests it should not be part of the release.

Just my 2 cents.

Andreas


On 5/17/07, Otis Gospodnetic <otis_gospodnetic@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> I like what Paul said here.  I was thinking the same about "unmaintained"
> contribs.
>
> Otis
>
> . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
> Simpy -- http://www.simpy.com/  -  Tag  -  Search  -  Share
>
> ----- Original Message ----
> From: Paul Elschot <paul.elschot@xs4all.nl>
> To: java-dev@lucene.apache.org
> Sent: Thursday, May 17, 2007 3:51:14 AM
> Subject: Re: Tests, Contribs, and Releases
>
> On Thursday 17 May 2007 09:10, Chris Hostetter wrote:
> ...
> > It could be argued that contribs are not important enough for contrib
> test
> > failures to result in a nightly build failing (I have no strong opinion
> > about this).  It could also be argued that while it's good to run test
> > against the "core" on a regular basis (ie: in the nightly), test
> failures
> > should not in and of themselves block a release -- so the ReleaseTodo
> > doesn't need to include any mention of running tests (I would argue
> > against this position very strongly)
> >
>
> I'd rather have a few tests too many, which means that I would prefer
> to have the contribs tested by default, and at least before a new release.
> Contribs depend on the core, and their tests might also indicate a
> problem in the core, even though that is not their intention.
>
> When a contrib fails and is not fixed, that might be a good reason to
> remove it from the distribution. With such a policy the present contribs
> would
> also stay up to date, provided their tests are good enough.
> Thinking about it a bit more, there is a process to add contribs, but
> there
> is not really a process to remove them. The policy of removing a contrib
> before a release when its unit tests fail could make a nice fit for that.
>
> Regards,
> Paul Elschot
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-help@lucene.apache.org
>
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-help@lucene.apache.org
>
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message