Rick Hillegas <rick.hille...@gmail.com> writes: > I have updated the Derby-trunk-JaCoCo configuration to use the 0.7.9 > JaCoCo jars at > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__people.apache.org_-7Erhillegas_derby_jacoco-2Djars_&d=DwIDaQ&c=RoP1YumCXCgaWHvlZYR8PZh8Bv7qIrMUB65eapI_JnE&r=mcFajTlbkIJ-DV-XHLk2TiSMDFfBhxQNXM5OBfEvYQ0&m=Otq7uQ72PfDMCJ4CD06LeG6bH0QqiepAX8rdSDsPTsM&s=ZhaPG5oM4BGrJfVvjLS03y6iz4nvtBip_vUHOgTHkhI&e=. > Let's see if that helps. > > Does anyone know why we also have a Derby-JaCoCo job (also broken)? > Why are we running JaCoCo twice and with different scripts?
Hi Rick, I did some maintenance on the Derby-JaCoCo job some years ago, after it had broken when we had moved to a newer Java version which was not supported by the JaCoCo version we were using. I remember that we had two jobs at that time too. Don't know why we had two, though. I left the Derby-trunk-JaCoCo job alone, because it appeared to be abandoned (it was disabled, I think), and also because it fetched jar files from a committer's home directory. The Derby-JaCoCo job fetched the jar files from Maven, which sounded more maintainable as it allowed others than that one committer to make updates, if required. I was actually planning to delete the Derby-trunk-JaCoCo job after a while if the Derby-JaCoCo proved to be stable. But apparently I forgot. > See > > > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__builds.apache.org_view_All_job_Derby-2DJaCoCo_configure&d=DwIDaQ&c=RoP1YumCXCgaWHvlZYR8PZh8Bv7qIrMUB65eapI_JnE&r=mcFajTlbkIJ-DV-XHLk2TiSMDFfBhxQNXM5OBfEvYQ0&m=Otq7uQ72PfDMCJ4CD06LeG6bH0QqiepAX8rdSDsPTsM&s=wulacnvwG-OWc5lbUU9q382NzVuIur7Z7LVngjcHYPU&e= > > and > > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__builds.apache.org_view_All_job_Derby-2Dtrunk-2DJaCoCo_configure&d=DwIDaQ&c=RoP1YumCXCgaWHvlZYR8PZh8Bv7qIrMUB65eapI_JnE&r=mcFajTlbkIJ-DV-XHLk2TiSMDFfBhxQNXM5OBfEvYQ0&m=Otq7uQ72PfDMCJ4CD06LeG6bH0QqiepAX8rdSDsPTsM&s=YOFIV1NAlpMLVIwmKggAqSvt93XoNP1PMcQU_jPbBgo&e= > > Thanks, > -Rick -- Knut Anders
