Ditto.  Thanks for thinking of it!

Scott Stirling

On 01 Feb 2001 10:51:38 -0500, Nese Myles wrote:
> That would very cool to see the JProbe Coverage tasks. That is what I am
> using as well.
>  
> thanks
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Stephane Bailliez [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Thursday, February 01, 2001 10:57 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: ant and junit
> 
> 
> 
> > -----Original Message----- 
> > From: Nese Myles [ mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ] 
> > Sent: Thursday, February 01, 2001 4:38 PM 
> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Apache. Org (E-mail) 
> > Subject: ant and junit 
> > 
> > 
> > I am currently building with Ant 1.1 and building JUnit 3.2  
> > test cases. 
> > This may seem a redundant question, but how will Ant improve 
> > the use of 
> > JUnit in the building process ? I am very interested in the 
> > Ant JUnit Tasks 
> > subject. 
> 
> I will answer this one so that Stefan can rest a little :) 
> 
> The only thing that will be added should be to have browsable reports
> (non-framed and in a javadoc framed way), some xsls will be able to be
> applied after the report.
> 
> Since report are individuals, the hack will be to collect all .xml files and
> aggregate them into a single one. You will be able to apply a stylesheet on
> this merged report.
> 
> As of now, there is to me something that is missing: the execution
> environment. I would like to add JVM properties of the test so that you know
> in what environment the tests where executed (OS, architecture, java
> version, file encoding, language, etc...)
> 
> Since you're Q&A you might be interested that I also wrote a couple of tasks
> for Sitraka JProbe Coverage. 
> I have used them yesterday to have information about the coverage of the
> junit tests and it is somewhat very cool. 
> 
> I hope to submit them very quickly. 
> 
> -- 
>  St�phane Bailliez 
>  Software Engineer, Paris - France 
>  iMediation - http://www.imediation.com <http://www.imediation.com>  
>  Disclaimer: All the opinions expressed above are mine and not those from my
> company. 
> 
> 

Reply via email to