Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-lucene-java-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 20094 invoked from network); 17 May 2007 07:10:48 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.2) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 17 May 2007 07:10:48 -0000 Received: (qmail 19159 invoked by uid 500); 17 May 2007 07:10:53 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-lucene-java-dev-archive@lucene.apache.org Received: (qmail 19116 invoked by uid 500); 17 May 2007 07:10:52 -0000 Mailing-List: contact java-dev-help@lucene.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: java-dev@lucene.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list java-dev@lucene.apache.org Received: (qmail 19105 invoked by uid 99); 17 May 2007 07:10:52 -0000 Received: from herse.apache.org (HELO herse.apache.org) (140.211.11.133) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 17 May 2007 00:10:52 -0700 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=10.0 tests= X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: neutral (herse.apache.org: local policy) Received: from [169.229.70.167] (HELO rescomp.berkeley.edu) (169.229.70.167) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 17 May 2007 00:10:45 -0700 Received: by rescomp.berkeley.edu (Postfix, from userid 1007) id DE8A55B770; Thu, 17 May 2007 00:10:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by rescomp.berkeley.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id DABA47F403 for ; Thu, 17 May 2007 00:10:24 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 17 May 2007 00:10:24 -0700 (PDT) From: Chris Hostetter To: Lucene Dev Subject: Re: Tests, Contribs, and Releases In-Reply-To: <474AF50D-B148-4984-8F41-FBD5DFF06A8E@apache.org> Message-ID: References: <66AEAD37-57D3-43DA-8B17-3E1C857E2135@aconex.com> <474AF50D-B148-4984-8F41-FBD5DFF06A8E@apache.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org : Yeah, I hate to admit it and start another round of Maven vs. ANT, Yeah, i guess i hsould have been more clear ... my question was not about how we could improve the build system to ensure this happens ... my question was about wether or not this behavior is desirable/intentional 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) So the question remains, regardless of what build system we have now, or may choose to have in the future: is the current behavior desirable, or do we want contrib-tests to be run more often, and do we want to make it a "policy" that tests should be run when building a release? -Hoss --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-help@lucene.apache.org