Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-myfaces-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 68304 invoked from network); 10 Feb 2006 14:53:51 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (209.237.227.199) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 10 Feb 2006 14:53:51 -0000 Received: (qmail 83957 invoked by uid 500); 10 Feb 2006 14:53:44 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-myfaces-dev-archive@myfaces.apache.org Received: (qmail 83906 invoked by uid 500); 10 Feb 2006 14:53:43 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@myfaces.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: "MyFaces Development" Delivered-To: mailing list dev@myfaces.apache.org Received: (qmail 83893 invoked by uid 99); 10 Feb 2006 14:53:43 -0000 Received: from asf.osuosl.org (HELO asf.osuosl.org) (140.211.166.49) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 10 Feb 2006 06:53:43 -0800 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.0 required=10.0 tests=SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (asf.osuosl.org: domain of sean.schofield@gmail.com designates 64.233.162.199 as permitted sender) Received: from [64.233.162.199] (HELO zproxy.gmail.com) (64.233.162.199) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 10 Feb 2006 06:53:39 -0800 Received: by zproxy.gmail.com with SMTP id x3so445370nzd for ; Fri, 10 Feb 2006 06:53:19 -0800 (PST) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=Jk+H3lXBStSXHYR0pPQZrotMuuN7bd3i/eQeuySOVLuMneh6smGF/zxqE/sAzlnNjJatjvJDdFfBEkuec2xk98ZwKY2Eu5ZloFYtAfAxRTMSAvZflwe5AsMtDIp8oStE7EIkIi3BQe6yae+TIKOg0F4Hfptrcz14tXUYz5jf2Us= Received: by 10.65.248.3 with SMTP id a3mr559338qbs; Fri, 10 Feb 2006 06:53:18 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.65.239.2 with HTTP; Fri, 10 Feb 2006 06:53:18 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <2387fbc50602100653y34004105o7cb3833fc61feb56@mail.gmail.com> Date: Fri, 10 Feb 2006 09:53:18 -0500 From: Sean Schofield To: MyFaces Development Subject: Re: Unit tests failing for tomahawk (local build) In-Reply-To: <2387fbc50602100649h2a593006mcee19a529c1bc5de@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline References: <2387fbc50602100649h2a593006mcee19a529c1bc5de@mail.gmail.com> X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org X-Spam-Rating: minotaur.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N Separate but related question. If a unit test fails the "install" fails. Will this prevent our website from showing the failed tests if continuum is building with: mvn clean install deploy site-deploy -Pgenerate-assembly,generate-site ? I have a feeling we may want to break this up into two commands: mvn clean install deploy mvn -Pgenerate-assembly, generate-site This way the failed unit tests get published. They are not failing on the zone b/c of the JDK but eventually someone will break a unit test there too. Thoughts? Sean On 2/10/06, Sean Schofield wrote: > Building local with 1.4.2_08 yields ... > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------= ------ > Battery: org.apache.myfaces.component.html.ext.HtmlDataTableTest > -------------------------------------------------------------------------= ------ > Tests run: 2, Failures: 0, Errors: 2, Time elapsed: 0.25 sec > > testGetClientIdFacesContext(org.apache.myfaces.component.html.ext.HtmlDat= aTableTest) > Time elapsed: 0.063 sec <<< ERROR! > > > > java.lang.NoSuchMethodError: > java.lang.StringBuffer.insert(ILjava/lang/CharSequence;)Ljava/lang/String= Buffer; > at javax.faces.component.UIComponentBase.getPathToComponent(UICom= ponentBase.java:793) > at javax.faces.component.UIComponentBase.getPathToComponent(UICom= ponentBase.java:764) > at javax.faces.component.UIComponentBase.getRenderer(UIComponentB= ase.java:747) > at javax.faces.component.UIComponentBase.getClientId(UIComponentB= ase.java:226) > at javax.faces.component.UIData.getClientId(UIData.java:463) > at > > > > This is a JSSE 5.0 language feature I assume? I know this subject > comes up from timt to time. For now I think we should stick to 1.4 > for tomahawk don't you think? > > Sean >