Re: Latest commits Unit Tests

2006-04-07 Thread Stefano Bagnara
I saw the problem too. I've had no time to investigate on this: the idea to assign them incrementally could work. Please submit a patch if you fix this succesfully! Thank you, Stefano Bernd Fondermann wrote: I made the observation that arbitrary tests seem to fail on random, but rare

Re: Latest commits Unit Tests

2006-03-27 Thread Bernd Fondermann
Stefano Bagnara wrote: Bernd Fondermann wrote: The AddFooter mailet should keep the charset of the mail, so adding the euro char in the footer should result in =A4 when the original mail is iso-8859-15 and =80 when the original mail is cp1252. Let me know if this works now. runs fine now.

Re: Latest commits Unit Tests

2006-03-26 Thread Stefano Bagnara
Bernd Fondermann wrote: Sorry to write that, but I updated to your AddFooter patch ;-) -- and got what seems to be a new one of the old one... This is really weird: I checked the code and it seems correct: It passes also if I set different standard encodings for my environment. Maybe your

Latest commits Unit Tests

2006-03-25 Thread Bernd Fondermann
Hi Stefano, since your last commits, some unit tests are no longer succeeding on my local trunk. two are easy fixes, but with the first one i am not so sure... Bernd ### MimeMessage*Test expected:...Cp1252... but was:...ISO-8859-1... impl seems to be platform specific and does fail on

Re: Latest commits Unit Tests

2006-03-25 Thread Stefano Bagnara
Bernd Fondermann wrote: since your last commits, some unit tests are no longer succeeding on my local trunk. two are easy fixes, but with the first one i am not so sure... Thank you Bernd for your test/help! ### MimeMessage*Test expected:...Cp1252... but was:...ISO-8859-1... impl seems to

Re: Latest commits Unit Tests

2006-03-25 Thread Bernd Fondermann
Stefano Bagnara wrote: Bernd Fondermann wrote: ### org.apache.james.core.MailImplTest getSize() behavior has been changed in MailImpl, so we have to adjust here: Yes, I saw this but I didn't fix it because I was not sure the new behaviour was better than the previous. I think we can

Re: Latest commits Unit Tests

2006-03-25 Thread Stefano Bagnara
You convinced me ;-) I'll commit your patch asap. Stefano Keeping a failing test would require meta-knowledge whether a test is 'supposed' to fail or not. all unit tests would soon become outdated and useless. the big merit of JUnit is you get a binary information after running the test.

Re: Latest commits Unit Tests

2006-03-25 Thread Bernd Fondermann
Sorry to write that, but I updated to your AddFooter patch ;-) -- and got what seems to be a new one of the old one... Testcase: testAddFooterTextPlainCP1252toISO8859 took 0.005 sec FAILED expected:...80... but was:...A4... junit.framework.ComparisonFailure: expected:...80... but