If Emma "enacts" your bytecode like Cobertura does for instance, you may
consider not shipping such bytecode as well. Instead ship the one without
debug symbols and the one which hasn't been "enacted" to be consumed by
code coverage tools et al.
Cheers
Daniel
On Tue, Dec 4, 2012 at 12:36 PM, Ben
On 04/12/12 05:35, Michael MacFadden wrote:
> Benson,
>
> I agree. There was some progress in mavenizing the build. I suspect that
> that solution will take some time.
For now it's working, though more recent commits are not merged, but
without community input, it's hard to keep up, though.
>
On Tue, Dec 4, 2012 at 12:35 AM, Michael MacFadden
wrote:
> Benson,
>
> I agree. There was some progress in mavenizing the build. I suspect that
> that solution will take some time. The build process is somewhat
> complicated at the moment, if this is the long term solution, we may need
> to do
On 04.12.2012 06:35, Michael MacFadden wrote:
> Benson,
>
> I agree. There was some progress in mavenizing the build. I suspect that
> that solution will take some time. The build process is somewhat
> complicated at the moment, if this is the long term solution, we may need
> to do something si
Benson,
I agree. There was some progress in mavenizing the build. I suspect that
that solution will take some time. The build process is somewhat
complicated at the moment, if this is the long term solution, we may need
to do something simpler to start off with.
In the case of Junit, we should
On Mon, Dec 3, 2012 at 4:39 PM, Michael MacFadden
wrote:
> Benson,
>
> Yes, Angus had been working this issue for us and found a few third party
> Jars. Here is an extract from his email:
>
> --
> There's a couple of things going on at once at the moment:
> -i'm in contact with the libIDN
Benson,
Yes, Angus had been working this issue for us and found a few third party
Jars. Here is an extract from his email:
--
There's a couple of things going on at once at the moment:
-i'm in contact with the libIDN author, who is happy to release the
software under the Apache license,
Dear Wave,
I don't understand the remark in your report about the need to
'obfuscate' third party jar files. Could you please elaborate? Do you
have problems with dependencies with incompatible licenses, or
something else?
Thanks,
Benson
--
