m within an Ant build file
> would be an option, I'll try to carve out some time for that.
>
> Stefan
>
>> On 2016-12-19, Michael Clarke wrote:
>>
>> Stefan,
>
>> It's failing as the slave is running on Java 7 so can't read the SonarQube
Stefan,
It's failing as the slave is running on Java 7 so can't read the SonarQube
plugin's Java 8 classes. You'll need to find a slave running on Java 8 (not
just with Java 8 installed), although I couldn't find one from the quick
selection I checked.
Thanks
Michael
> On 19 Dec 2016, at 14:4
I'm interested in this.
On 7 March 2016 at 02:53, Antoine Levy Lambert wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I would like to request open source licenses for Intellij in the name of
> the Apache Ant project.
>
> Who is interested ?
>
> Best regards,
>
> Antoine
> -
I personally don't think we should constrain ourselves to supporting End of
Life'd versions of Java: anyone wanting to use an older version of Java can
download an older version of Ant. That being said, Ant doesn't introduce
major new features particularly often so we may not be losing too much by
I've applied a fix to the Jenkins Matrix Plugin for the issue that Olivier
raised, and jglick has kindly merged it and released the plugin. We'll need
one of the Jenkins admins to update the matrix plugin (or downgrade
Jenkins) to hopefully bring our matrix job back.
On 6 May 2014 12:27, Antoine
+1 from me for Ant, +0 for the other associated projects.
I'm happy to help with any migration or post migration cleanup of
docs/processes, but am only properly familiar with the Ant core so may
not be much help with the likes of Ivy but can give it a shot if
needed.
> On 28 Apr 2014, at 13:32, "
I think a move to Git is a good idea.
I personally don't have a huge issue with using Subversion, but Git would
make it easier to allow potentially high impact changes to be made outside
of the mainline repository. These changes could then be opened up for
review by others before any decision abou
The Jenkins master got rebooted shortly after this failure so I don't know
if the Ops were already up to something. Neither Windows slave is currently
active so I can't see if the reboot has recovered the build or not.
Our Windows builds just generally don't seem right:
JDK 1.8 on Windows gives t
>
> buildRule.executeTarget("test1");
> ==> could the BuildFileRule use a default (test name) for executeTarget?
> buildRule.executeTarget();
>
I'm not sure it can - the same build file is often used for multiple tests,
each calling a different target, so how would we know which target was
int
Hi,
I've now completed the migration of Ant's test cases to JUnit4 and would
like to give other developers a chance to review/comment on these changes
before I merge them back into SVN. My changes can be found on Github at
https://github.com/mc1arke/ant/tree/JUnit4Conversion (
https://github.com/m
I had started this a few months back (
https://github.com/mc1arke/ant/tree/JUnit4Conversion) but got side-tracked
due to a job change. I'd be happy to go back and continue/finish the work
if there's a general demand for it.
On 31 March 2014 01:14, Matt Sicker wrote:
> I'd be a willing volunteer
+1
Thanks,
Michael
> On 22 Nov 2013, at 17:08, Antoine Levy-Lambert wrote:
>
> I would like to nominate Charles Duffy as a committer. Charles has proposed
> a number of patches to Ivy such as IVY-1421, IVY-1423, IVY-1424 and
> recently a patch concerning the useorigin attribute for the case of U
+1 from me too
On 19 May 2013 13:22, Jean-Louis Boudart wrote:
> +1
>
>
> 2013/5/16 Antoine Levy Lambert
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > I have uploaded candidate artefacts for an ant 1.9.1 release to :
> > http://people.apache.org/~antoine/dist
> >
> > Let's vote on releasing these.
> >
> >
> > Let's start
dent upon junit.jar
> without specifying minimal versions and without differentiating between
> junit3 and junit4.
>
> It would help if someone would explain the dependency in more detail.
>
> Regards,
>
> Antoine
>
> On Mar 30, 2013, at 2:44 PM, Stefan Bodewig
+1 from me too
On 3 May 2013, at 09:37, Jean-Louis Boudart wrote:
> +1
>
>
> 2013/5/3 Antoine Levy Lambert
>
>> I wonder whether we could not add if an unless on all nested elements in
>> the framework ?
>>
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Antoine
>> On May 3, 2013, at 2:57 AM, Jean-Louis Boudart wrote:
>>
I've fixed the JUnit task to repair the JUnit3/JUnit4 split. Could the Gump
config changes [1] be reversed so Gump reverts to loading ant-junit4.jar as
part of its tests?
Thanks,
Michael
[1] http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revision&revision=1460263
a
patch if wanted?
Thanks,
Michael
On 30 March 2013 18:44, Stefan Bodewig wrote:
> On 2013-03-28, Stefan Bodewig wrote:
>
> > On 2013-03-27, Michael Clarke wrote:
>
> >>>> * the optional ant-junit4.jar has been merged into ant-junit.jar
> >>>> as
> +* the optional ant-junit4.jar has been merged into ant-junit.jar
> + as Ant now requires JUnit4.
Is it really the case that Ant requires JUnit4? The changes I
introduced for @Ignore annotations in Ant 1.9.0 shouldn't impact
backwards compatibility with JUnit3 and I don't believe any other
chan
This can be done using the CvsChangeLog task [1].
Thanks
Michael
[1] http://ant.apache.org/manual/Tasks/changelog.html
On 11 Mar 2013, at 07:32, salt2012 wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> Please let us know how to get the list of modified files in CVS using ant.
>
>
> Thanks
> Salt
>
>
>
> --
> View this m
>From the release notes:
> - support for @Ignore annotation and requirement of JUnit 4.11
This isn't quite true: we now support @Ignore in JUnit4 but should be
able to support all JUnit versions. The change in JUnit JAR in the
optional directory was to allow testing of Assume failures with a
speci
I'm not sure why my patch didn't make it onto the list so I've cloned the
Ant Github repository to my account [1] and applied my example changes [2].
I'll leave the discussion around Git versus Subversion for others to debate
(Git would get my vote for what it's worth). I'm happy to either contrib
I'd like to make a proposal around unit testing the Ant core.
Whilst Ant has support for JUnit4, most of the unit tests are written
against JUnit 3. This itself isn't an issue, although some of the existing
test structures prevent new test being written in JUnit4.
I'd like to propose introducing
It looks like my patch to fix JUnit Ignore notifications has broken
compilation on Java 1.5 machines. I've fixed this in the attached patch by
replacing !String#isEmpty() calls with String#length() !=0 and removing
@Override annotations on implementations of interface methods.
Sorry for breaking t
23 matches
Mail list logo
