I tried running the tests over 10 times and they never passed on my
system. I commented out the tests in DeepMergeOperationTest.java and the
rest built fine.
On Wed, Jul 18, 2018 at 10:55 AM Nikita Timofeev
wrote:
> Andrus mentioned problems with this test too, it fails more than passes.
> I t
I have the same test failure. If I skip the tests, the rest of the release
check completes successfully for me, so I am +1.
I'd recommend just adding an @Ignore annotation to this test so that the
rest of the tests can be run without any problems.
On Wed, Jul 18, 2018 at 9:55 AM Nikita Timofeev
I ran my checks and this release looks good. +1
On Tue, Jul 17, 2018 at 3:06 AM Nikita Timofeev
wrote:
> Thanks Andrus for catch, tried to shortcut via Mac, no luck :)
>
> Rebuild windows assemblies and committed (with new signatures) to
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/cayenne/4.1.M2/
Andrus mentioned problems with this test too, it fails more than passes.
I think it still fails sometime in master branch and this problem
should be addressed some day.
Though it doesn't look like a new issue for this release.
On Wed, Jul 18, 2018 at 5:15 PM, Michael Gentry wrote:
> [mrg 10:14:00
[mrg 10:14:00]
~/Projects/Cayenne-Release/cayenne-3.1.3-src/framework/cayenne-jdk1.5-unpublished/target/surefire-reports
> cat org.apache.cayenne.util.DeepMergeOperationTest.txt
---
Test set: org.apache.cayenne.util.DeepMer
I'm getting:
[INFO] Cayenne Java 1.5 Unpublished ... FAILURE [
54.735 s]
I'll investigate as it could be a system issue.
Thanks,
mrg
On Wed, Jul 11, 2018 at 7:39 AM Nikita Timofeev
wrote:
> Hi all.
>
> This is a maintenance release of 3.1 version.
>
> Maven repo:
> https
> Am 18.07.2018 um 15:31 schrieb Andrus Adamchik :
>>
>> On Jul 18, 2018, at 4:19 PM, Andrus Adamchik wrote:
>>
>>> On Jul 18, 2018, at 4:04 PM, Maik Musall wrote:
>>>
BTW, with your Gson serialization, how do you deal with controlled
serialization of essentially infinite gr
> On Jul 18, 2018, at 4:19 PM, Andrus Adamchik wrote:
>
>
>
>> On Jul 18, 2018, at 4:04 PM, Maik Musall wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> BTW, with your Gson serialization, how do you deal with controlled
>>> serialization of essentially infinite graphs? Do you provide a spec of how
>>> deep to go down
> On Jul 18, 2018, at 4:04 PM, Maik Musall wrote:
>
>>
>> BTW, with your Gson serialization, how do you deal with controlled
>> serialization of essentially infinite graphs? Do you provide a spec of how
>> deep to go down the relationships path?
>
> I don't have that problem in my experime
> Am 17.07.2018 um 19:12 schrieb Andrus Adamchik :
>
>> I'm experimenting with 4.1 and field-based DataObjects. I noticed, using the
>> standard 4.1 server superclass template, that the fields that cover
>> relationships aren't narrowly typed but are simply specified as Object,
>> which is ap
10 matches
Mail list logo
