[status] build: SUCCESSFUL, test: SUCCESSFUL | Linux 2.4.26, 2004-08-03

2004-08-03 Thread dblevins
NIGHTLY BUILD/TEST
  Date: Tue Aug  3 05:30:45 EDT 2004
  Kernel: Linux 2.4.26
  Host: beaver.codehaus.org
  Java: 1.4.2_04-b05, mixed mode
  Maven: 1.0

CHECKOUT: incubator-geronimo

BUILDING: incubator-geronimo

BUILD SUCCESSFUL
Total time: 13 minutes 3 seconds
Finished at: Tue Aug 03 05:45:32 EDT 2004


[jira] Assigned: (GERONIMO-281) Optional packages support

2004-08-03 Thread dev
Message:

   The following issue has been re-assigned.

   Assignee: Jacek Laskowski (mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED])
-
View the issue:
  http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-281

Here is an overview of the issue:
-
Key: GERONIMO-281
Summary: Optional packages support
   Type: New Feature

 Status: Open
   Priority: Major

Project: Apache Geronimo
 Components: 
 deployment
 OpenEJB

   Assignee: Jacek Laskowski
   Reporter: Jacek Laskowski

Created: Tue, 3 Aug 2004 4:37 AM
Updated: Tue, 3 Aug 2004 4:37 AM

Description:

Add optional packages support. Optional packages are resources listed in 
META-INF/MANIFEST.MF as a value of the Class-Path main attribute.

As a workaround it's possible to copy the resources to repository directory and 
specify them in a vendor specific way/DD, e.g. META-INF/openejb-jar.xml.

The suggested approach to handle it is (Dain's email to OpenEJB dev mailing 
list):

[...]Instead I would create a lib directory in the config-store directory for 
the module (i.e., a config-store/${number}/lib directory).  Then, just read in 
the manifest class path entries for the ejb jar, copy them into the lib dir and 
add them to the configuration class-path.  One trick is you must repeat this 
for each jar copied into the lib as each of these can have manifest class path 
entries.  Also watch out for circular dependencies in the manifest class path 
entries.[...]


-
JIRA INFORMATION:
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.

If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators:
   http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/Administrators.jspa

If you want more information on JIRA, or have a bug to report see:
   http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira



Re: Unit/Stress Tests

2004-08-03 Thread David Jencks
Before we jump off the cliff here, just how long do the stress tests 
currently take?  I don't think it is a significant fraction of the 
build time.  I recall trying this idea of isolating stress tests in 
jboss builds and it turned into a real mess.  Noone likes maintaining 
the test system, lets keep it as simple as possible.  I think setting 
up damage control would be more useful.

Also I have set up all the projects we are collectively involved in in 
a single build environment
(tranql, howl, geronimo, openejb, activemq).  I suggest we set up 
something like this to be run by dc.

david jencks
On Aug 3, 2004, at 9:10 AM, Dain Sundstrom wrote:
On Aug 3, 2004, at 7:41 AM, Alan D. Cabrera wrote:
1) There is a maven build flag that lets builds complete, regardless 
of
the tests' completion status.  IMHO, if something breaks for them, 
then
something is broken for their configuration and they should know about
it; this is the raison d'etre of unit tests.  People who cannot handle
this should be directed to pre-built jars, though I suspect that most
responsible shops will run the unit tests on their target platforms.

However, if it takes a long time, then this is a different matter; I
like David Jenks' idea of running smaller, quicker, tests.
Although that is an good idea, I think the implementation is much more 
difficult.  Until we have parameterized stress tests, I'd say the best 
plan is to isolate stress tests and only run them during the nightly 
build.

-dain



Re: Unit/Stress Tests

2004-08-03 Thread David Blevins
On Tue, Aug 03, 2004 at 09:19:54AM -0700, David Jencks wrote:
 Before we jump off the cliff here, just how long do the stress tests 
 currently take?  

Ok, never mind, I retract the idea.  I just ran some comparisons and
came out with some interesting numbers.

On my 3Ghz WinXP/Cygwin box, these are the numbers I get:

$ maven clean; maven -Dmaven.test.failure.ignore=true  build1.log
BUILD SUCCESSFUL
Total time: 26 minutes 54 seconds

Totalling up the actual Time elapsed numbers accounts for only 4.5 minutes 
(274 seconds) of that time.

$ maven clean; maven -Dmaven.test.skip=true  build2.log
BUILD SUCCESSFUL
Total time: 6 minutes 49 seconds

That's basically a 20 minute difference with only 4.5 minutes
reportedly spend on our tests.  What is taking up the other 15
minutes?  Is setUp/tearDown not counted in the test time?

-David




Re: Unit/Stress Tests

2004-08-03 Thread Dain Sundstrom
I think the reason our stress tests don't take very long, is we are 
limiting them because we don't want the build to take a long time.  I 
think once we remove this limitation the test time will grow and we 
will get actual stress testing.

-dain
On Aug 3, 2004, at 11:19 AM, David Jencks wrote:
Before we jump off the cliff here, just how long do the stress tests 
currently take?  I don't think it is a significant fraction of the 
build time.  I recall trying this idea of isolating stress tests in 
jboss builds and it turned into a real mess.  Noone likes maintaining 
the test system, lets keep it as simple as possible.  I think setting 
up damage control would be more useful.

Also I have set up all the projects we are collectively involved in in 
a single build environment
(tranql, howl, geronimo, openejb, activemq).  I suggest we set up 
something like this to be run by dc.

david jencks
On Aug 3, 2004, at 9:10 AM, Dain Sundstrom wrote:
On Aug 3, 2004, at 7:41 AM, Alan D. Cabrera wrote:
1) There is a maven build flag that lets builds complete, regardless 
of
the tests' completion status.  IMHO, if something breaks for them, 
then
something is broken for their configuration and they should know 
about
it; this is the raison d'etre of unit tests.  People who cannot 
handle
this should be directed to pre-built jars, though I suspect that most
responsible shops will run the unit tests on their target platforms.

However, if it takes a long time, then this is a different matter; I
like David Jenks' idea of running smaller, quicker, tests.
Although that is an good idea, I think the implementation is much 
more difficult.  Until we have parameterized stress tests, I'd say 
the best plan is to isolate stress tests and only run them during the 
nightly build.

-dain