karan malhi wrote: > Could there be a switch to over-ride the global exclude list > entry/entries? This way a module by default would use a global exclude > list and also have the freedom to ignore it and use the module exclude > list.
In the incoming HARMONY-57 contribution the list is 'global', but you can override the exclusion list by specifying a replacement's location in a java property. In future, I see the global list as simply a dynamic amalgam of the module lists in the target. If we put the exclude lists in a standard location, (in the repo and in the tests jar file(s)) then they can be found by the test framework. Regards, Tim > Geir Magnusson Jr wrote: > However, I did imagine that we'd give the modules a bit of freedom and > independence for testing - a global exclude list might impact that? > >> >> >> Stepan Mishura wrote: >> >>> Did anybody think of creating a 'global' (i.e. shared by all modules) >>> exclude list or every module will have its own exclude list? Or Harmony >>> tests will always pass and we don't need it at all :-) >> >> >> That would be the goal :) >> >>> I see at least the following benefits of creating 'global' exclude >>> list: all >>> know issues are kept in one well known place (they don't spread between >>> several private lists) >> >> >> That's true, but.... I always imagined that people would be working >> in the modules anyway, so there isn't much gain. >> >> also it is easier to create an exclude list for a >> >>> target platform, for example, linux.exclude or win.exclude. >> >> >> Yes, that could be. Interesting idea. >> >> However, I did imagine that we'd give the modules a bit of freedom and >> independence for testing - a global exclude list might impact that? >> >> geir >> >>> >>> Thoughts? >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Stepan Mishura >>> Intel Middleware Products Division >>> >> > -- Tim Ellison ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) IBM Java technology centre, UK.
