Bill Dudney wrote:
BTW: what is the general consensus among us regarding tests ? I'd
love to see a set of automated integration tests that at least
clicked through the whole sample/simple example tree as a starter and
then build from that.
+1 !!! We desperately need unit tests integrated. I'm currently creating
tests externally and it's a pain. If we could also just have a simple
ant task to run the tests (in each subproject) that would be great.
BTW, what is the status of the Cactus tests in the new SVN layout ? Can
we somehow consolidate unit tests and the Cactus tests ?
I'm willing to start it but its very hard to maintain if we are not
all committed to running the tests before we commit.
I would propose that anyone committing a change that causes a test to
fail be put in a small interrogation room with the Manfred Geiler Bad
Cop. Be very afraid.
Anyway sorry for the long message and thanks again Sean for all the
hard work.
TTFN,
-bd-
On Jul 7, 2005, at 3:49 PM, Sean Schofield wrote:
Bill,
I see your point but I think that this goal should apply to the
tomahawk subproject. IMO it doesn't make much sense to support
building impl without also building api. Why would you ever separate
the two (even for testing?)
I definitely see the advantage in compiling tomahawk against RI and
MyFaces and there is support for that now. Being able to compile imp
using an api.jar is tricky because what if I just want to runt the
"compile" target. Then there is no myfaces-api.jar to run against ...
I think test cases for each subproject would be good. (There is a
small number of legacy ones and they have not been ported over.) I
don't have any bright ideas at the moment.
What to do you think about all of this?
sean
On 7/7/05, Bill Dudney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi Sean,
Perhaps I misunderstand the reasoning behind the sub-projects.
What I expected was that each subproject was build-able on its own as
a 'deliverable' chunk. If I wanted to I could grab the sub-projects
I'm interested in and work only with those (i.e. if I only care about
impl I could have an api.jar file around and work on the impl code
alone).
Do I have it wrong? If so no big deal I can go work in current for
now.
The use case is for testing purposes. I'd like to have a set of tests
for api, a set for impl etc. Then the new developer to myfaces can
make a change in one of the subproject, run the tests there and be
relatively sure that they have not broken anything. Its part of the
safety net concept we talked about before the reorg got started.
TTFN,
-bd-
On Jul 7, 2005, at 3:06 PM, Sean Schofield wrote:
The problem is I've got shared checked out as 'myfaces-shared'
instead of shared so the shared.src.dir property points to the wrong
spot.
Why did you do this? The "suggested" approach is to check out using
the *current* shortcut. (I'm working on the documentation for that
now btw.)
Can you give me a use case for building in the manner you are
describing?
sean
.
