On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 2:45 PM, Simone Tripodi <simone.trip...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi guys, > one more question: what about keeping or removing the Test > classes/methods that just declare the Suite? AFAIK are not more > needed... <snip/>
Don't have a strong opinion -- if someone wants to do it. -Rahul > Thanks in advance, > Simo > > http://people.apache.org/~simonetripodi/ > http://www.99soft.org/ > > > > On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 8:29 PM, Simone Tripodi > <simone.trip...@gmail.com> wrote: >> Hi Seb, >> thanks for your feedbacks, always appreciated! I know and understand >> the need of having the package.html files, but what do you think about >> replacing them with the package-info.java files? It should be the >> same, or not? I've been working with them and found it very >> comfortables. >> I'll start staking care of migrating the JUnit dependency, is it fine >> for you just adding the @Test annotation on existing methods, without >> renaming them? The number of tests is quite large... :P >> Thanks in advance, have a nice day, >> Simo >> >> http://people.apache.org/~simonetripodi/ >> http://www.99soft.org/ >> >> >> >> On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 6:09 PM, sebb <seb...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> On 31 August 2010 17:02, sebb <seb...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> On 31 August 2010 14:39, Simone Tripodi <simone.trip...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> Hi Rahul, >>>>> I just added the xdoc version of the documentation present in the >>>>> package.html files. >>>> >>>> The package.html files are normally used to annotate the Javadoc output. >>>> >>>> However in this case these files have got a lot more content than is >>>> normally present in the Javadoc. >>>> >>>>> Do you think these last can be removed, since >>>>> would be redundant with the new developers guide? >>>> >>>> There should at least be minimal package.html files for Javadoc usage, >>>> so I don't think the files should be removed entirely, but they could >>>> be replaced with much simpler versions. >>>> >>>>> At this stage, we >>>>> should maintain two different data sources with same information, I'd >>>>> propose to drop the existing one, but let choose together. >>>>> Another small question: in src/conf there is a MANIFEST.MF[1] file >>>>> that contains informations that maven can generate automatically, do >>>>> you think we can drop it, when dropping the ant build? >>>> >>>> +1 to dropping MANIFEST.MF. >>>> >>>>> Thanks in advance, have a nice day! >>>>> Simo >>>>> >>>>> [1] >>>>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/commons/proper/digester/trunk/src/conf/MANIFEST.MF >>>>> >>> >>> Forgot to add - could update JUnit to the latest 4.x release, i.e. 4.8.1 --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
