myfaces-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Mike Kienenberger" <mkien...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Heads Up on Shale Test Framework API Change
Date Sat, 12 Aug 2006 00:34:55 GMT
And it's only failing for one of the Tomahawk tests, so it's not
really a MyFaces core test that's failing (as far as I can tell).
But still........

I checked out Shale Test, located all the dependencies, and created a
patch.   As far as I can tell, it's the only problem in the codebase.
Eclipse didn't identify any other problems.

On 8/11/06, Mike Kienenberger <mkienenb@gmail.com> wrote:
> No, it's a Java 1.5 method that snuck into Shale Test 1.0.3-snapshot.
>  I should have been more clear about that.
>
> https://issues.apache.org/struts/browse/SHALE-251
>
> But yeah, that would be good for us as well.
>
> On 8/11/06, Dennis Byrne <dennis@dbyrne.net> wrote:
> > Perhaps we can also get mvn to enforce this in local development as well?
> >
> > Mike, Did you mean 1.1.3 snap ?
> >
> > Dennis Byrne
> >
> > >-----Original Message-----
> > >From: Mike Kienenberger [mailto:mkienenb@gmail.com]
> > >Sent: Friday, August 11, 2006 07:46 PM
> > >To: 'MyFaces Development'
> > >Cc: 'Craig McClanahan'
> > >Subject: Re: Heads Up on Shale Test Framework API Change
> > >
> > >Speaking of breakage, there's a Java 1.5 method dependency in the
> > >1.0.3-snapshot, which is causing MyFaces to fail to build with testing
> > >enabled (the default) under Java 1.4.
> > >
> > >https://issues.apache.org/struts/browse/SHALE-251
> > >
> > >It'd be great if we could get this fixed at the same time.
> > >
> > >It'd probably be a good idea if Shale had an automated way to catch
> > >Java 1.4 incompatibilities right away.
> > >
> > >This brings up another issue.   Should MyFaces 1.1 be requiring Java
> > >1.4 to run tests?  We're obligated to provide 1.3 support for the core
> > >as it stands.   My personal thoughts are that requiring 1.4 to run the
> > >tests isn't the end of the world, but should at least be documented
> > >somewhere.
> > >
> > >Do we have continuum set up to build the core with Java 1.3 to insure
> > >there aren't any Java 1.4 methods sneaking into the code?
> > >
> > >
> > >On 8/11/06, Craig McClanahan <craigmcc@apache.org> wrote:
> > >> We're looking at implementing a suggestion[1] to change the API on the
> > >> setUp() and tearDown() methods of
> > >> org.apache.shale.test.base.AbstractJsfTestCase, to add
> > >> "throws Exception" to the method signatures.  The primary goal is to be
> > >> consistent with the underlying TestCase class from JUnit 3.8.1, and to
allow
> > >> test developers to go ahead and let JUnit handle exceptions here like you
> > >> often do when you add "throws Exception" to individual test methods.
> > >>
> > >> Implementing this change, of course, will cause all existing test cases
that
> > >> extend this base class to not compile.  Looking at the MyFaces and Trinidad
> > >> codebases, there are indeed a few such tests (although not a gigantic
> > >> number).  What I propose to do is to make the change in the Shale code,
and
> > >> then fix the test cases in MyFaces and Trinidad and check those in too
> > >> (since I'm a committer on both repositories).
> > >>
> > >> Does anyone see any problem with me doing this (probably over the weekend
at
> > >> some point)?
> > >>
> > >> Craig McClanahan
> > >>
> > >> [1] https://issues.apache.org/struts/browse/SHALE-249
> > >>
> > >>
> > >
> >
> >
> >
>

Mime
View raw message