On 3/1/2011 3:49 AM, Stefan Bodewig wrote:
On 2011-03-01, Antoine Levy-Lambert wrote:
OK I have done "something".
Thank you. I have tweaked a few things and am just running the full
testsuite on my windows box where problems with undeleteable jars tend
to show up.
Thanks too.
I have seen t
On 2011-03-01, Antoine Levy-Lambert wrote:
> OK I have done "something".
Thank you. I have tweaked a few things and am just running the full
testsuite on my windows box where problems with undeleteable jars tend
to show up.
> I have seen that the java resources like ${java:foo!foo.properties} i
OK I have done "something".
for taskdef-test.xml I have added 5 properties test1.jar to test5.jar
which correspond to work entries in gump.
I have seen that the java resources like ${java:foo!foo.properties} in
replacetokens-test.xml do not lend themselves to standardisation.
I wanted to replace
On 2/28/11 11:02 AM, Stefan Bodewig wrote:
> On 2011-02-28, Antoine Levy-Lambert wrote:
>
>> I see now that in fact there are still 21 antunit tests failing in gump
>> (see [1] and [2] below) :
>> Do we want to add a work entry in gump metadata for each of the
>> directories where these tests creat
On 2011-02-28, Antoine Levy-Lambert wrote:
> I see now that in fact there are still 21 antunit tests failing in gump
> (see [1] and [2] below) :
> Do we want to add a work entry in gump metadata for each of the
> directories where these tests create classes or resources ?
> Or do we want to someh
Hello Stefan,
I see now that in fact there are still 21 antunit tests failing in gump
(see [1] and [2] below) :
Do we want to add a work entry in gump metadata for each of the
directories where these tests create classes or resources ?
Or do we want to somehow standardize and have a convention th
