On Mon, Aug 20, 2012 at 2:00 PM, Babak Vahdat <babak.vah...@swissonline.ch> wrote: > Hi > > There was an old revision not being backported to the 2.9.x branch causing > the SFTP tests to fail on this branch after I re-enabled them. > > After backporting this revision all the tests did pass on this branch as > well: > > https://builds.apache.org/job/Camel.2.9.x.fulltest/org.apache.camel$camel-ftp/128/testReport/ >
Nice work. Great to know it all tests fine on all our branches now. > Babak > > > Willem.Jiang wrote >> >> Hi Babak, >> >> Camel.2.9.x.fulltest[1] are failed with this change, can you have a look >> at it? >> >> [1] >> https://builds.apache.org/job/Camel.2.9.x.fulltest/lastBuild/#showFailuresLink >> >> -- >> Willem Jiang >> >> FuseSource >> Web: http://www.fusesource.com (http://www.fusesource.com/) >> Blog: http://willemjiang.blogspot.com (http://willemjiang.blogspot.com/) >> (English) >> http://jnn.javaeye.com (http://jnn.javaeye.com/) (Chinese) >> Twitter: willemjiang >> Weibo: willemjiang >> >> >> >> >> >> On Saturday, August 18, 2012 at 4:36 AM, Babak Vahdat wrote: >> >>> Hi >>> >>> O.K. this's fixed now, as well there're 14 SFTP tests which are >>> re-enabled >>> so that we can now count on their regression-check. >>> >>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CAMEL-5514 >>> >>> Babak >>> >>> >>> Babak Vahdat wrote >>> > >>> > Am 16.08.12 15:32 schrieb "Hadrian Zbarcea" unter <hzbarcea@>: >>> > >>> > > @Babak, >>> > > >>> > > Why produce output only under target? Only to allow `mvn clean` to >>> clean >>> > > up properly. Maven conventions... >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > I don't really get your point here! "mvn clean" would *still* clean up >>> > properly even if the tests would create the file under the path >>> > FTP_ROOT_DIR which is "target/res/home" and not directly inside the >>> > "target" folder. Currently it's even worse, as an example try to run >>> the >>> > first test method of SftpSimpleProduceTest which is the method >>> > testSftpSimpleProduce and then look where "hello.txt" get's generated! >>> It >>> > will get generated at the same level of the target folder!!! Then >>> > subversion will consider this as an outgoing change the next time you >>> > would sync with the repo. The reason for this is pretty clear as you >>> > changed the line: >>> > >>> > template.sendBodyAndHeader("sftp://localhost:"; + getPort() + "/" + >>> > FTP_ROOT_DIR + "?username=admin&password=admin", "Hello World", >>> > Exchange.FILE_NAME, "hello.txt"); >>> > >>> > To: >>> > >>> > >>> > template.sendBodyAndHeader("sftp://localhost:"; + getPort() + >>> > "/?username=admin&password=admin", "Hello World", Exchange.FILE_NAME, >>> > "hello.txt"); >>> > >>> > > Same applies to log files in other >>> > > components. I am not sure I cleaned up in all the places. >>> > > >>> > > I noticed that too. The tests were @Ignore'd before my changes and I >>> > > don't think the reason for failures is only what you mentioned. >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > This's not true! >>> > >>> > Yes the tests were *already* @Ignore'd before you modified them and >>> that >>> > is exactly the root cause of the problem as otherwise we had realized >>> this >>> > much sooner (e.g. by next build on CI-Server). As an example consider >>> > *another* test class: SftpSimpleProduceNotStepwiseTest where you're the >>> > last modifier of it (well, Daniel changed some svn:props after you but >>> > that's not relevant for this discussion). Now enable and run the tests, >>> > all 3 will fail, take the previous revision *before* your change, they >>> > will all pass! >>> > >>> > Just to make sure you don't misunderstand me: my aim is NOT to accuse >>> you >>> > or whatnot BUT only to FIX the existing problem creeping after your >>> > revision. As we all know no body is perfect and we do all make mistakes >>> > (including myself). Anyway, I'll raise a JIRA and take over this to fix >>> > them all. >>> > >>> > Thanks for your reply and attention. >>> > >>> > Babak >>> > >>> > > As the >>> > > setUp() did take place, directories were created in the wrong place. >>> > > >>> > > I hope this helps, >>> > > Hadrian >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > On 08/16/2012 06:14 AM, Babak Vahdat wrote: >>> > > > Just for the sake of completeness: >>> > > > >>> > > > The broken unit-tests being mentioned here are all "@Ignore"ed, so >>> > > > you've to >>> > > > enable them to see that they're really broken. :-) >>> > > > >>> > > > Babak >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > -- >>> > > > View this message in context: >>> > > > >>> http://camel.465427.n5.nabble.com/About-the-camel-ftp-unit-tests-which-ar >>> > > > e-broken-tp5717372p5717495.html >>> > > > Sent from the Camel Development mailing list archive at Nabble.com >>> (http://Nabble.com). >>> > > >>> > >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> View this message in context: >>> http://camel.465427.n5.nabble.com/About-the-camel-ftp-unit-tests-which-are-broken-tp5717372p5717640.html >>> Sent from the Camel Development mailing list archive at Nabble.com >>> (http://Nabble.com). >> > > > > > -- > View this message in context: > http://camel.465427.n5.nabble.com/About-the-camel-ftp-unit-tests-which-are-broken-tp5717372p5717707.html > Sent from the Camel Development mailing list archive at Nabble.com. -- Claus Ibsen ----------------- FuseSource Email: cib...@fusesource.com Web: http://fusesource.com Twitter: davsclaus, fusenews Blog: http://davsclaus.com Author of Camel in Action: http://www.manning.com/ibsen
