On Sun, Nov 18, 2012 at 7:13 PM, Barrie Treloar <[email protected]> wrote: > On Mon, Nov 19, 2012 at 9:39 AM, Brett Porter <[email protected]> wrote: >> As Hervé says, it'll depend on the reports you're using. Cobertura forks to >> ensure the tests are run with the instrumented classes - though I believe >> most code coverage plugins have some options to inject that into your main >> build stream and then produce the report on the data at the end. > > There is another post I've made because I have had this problem in the past. > > My resolution is to use -X and pipe the output to a file. > > Then manually go through and Maven 3 has excellent comments about what > it is doing so it is obvious where a plugin is starting and > potentially forking. > I just deleted everything but those markers and then analyze what they > are telling me. > > I recommend doing this in two steps, 1) delete everything else 2) analyze. > As trying to scan through the file by eye misses things and caused me > to head off in the wrong directions. > Once I had just the bits I needed it was obvious where the problem was. > > Which probably brings us to the logging discussion currently going on...
Barrie, I understand this much, but what I don't understand is what to do about it. Is there any choice other than to stop using reporting plugins that do the forking? Or can I put the executions of them ahead of site:site on the command line or something? > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
