On 2010-02-02, Antoine Levy Lambert wrote:
> Continuing a thread from the user list.
> Do we want to remove the pages about the svn antlib from our web site
> as Jürgen Knuplesch suggests ?
> I think so.
It might be a good idea to move the antlib to a new "dormant" state and
leave it there.
S
On 2010-02-02, Paul King wrote:
> Non-binding +1 from me. The latest snapshot successfully built
> and ran all of Groovy's tests including a small set of AntBuilder
> tests. The removal of the fall-back mechanism for unresolved references
> did cause a test containing a stray unused/unreferenced
Continuing a thread from the user list.
Do we want to remove the pages about the svn antlib from our web site as
Jürgen Knuplesch suggests ?
I think so.
Let's check whether we are referencing Svn4Ant project @
http://jwaresoftware.org/wiki/svn4ant
and svnant in our External Tools and Tasks
+1 from me.
Antoine Levy Lambert wrote:
Hi,
this vote cancels and replaces the vote started on Friday. The vote of
Friday is cancelled because of a
bug affecting the junit task which would have suppressed the stack
traces of failing tests.
The new build incorporates the fix for the junit s
Non-binding +1 from me. The latest snapshot successfully built
and ran all of Groovy's tests including a small set of AntBuilder
tests. The removal of the fall-back mechanism for unresolved references
did cause a test containing a stray unused/unreferenced classpathref
to fail where it was previo
