buildr-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Assaf Arkin" <ar...@intalio.com>
Subject Re: Emma and Cobertura getting to good for addon Re: svn commit: r700747 - /incubator/buildr/trunk/rakelib/rspec.rake
Date Mon, 06 Oct 2008 01:14:07 GMT
On Sun, Oct 5, 2008 at 5:21 PM, Alex Boisvert <boisvert@intalio.com> wrote:
> I'm fine either way.  We just have to pick one way, migrate the current
> plugins and document how to do it.

We have 11 components in addons, so we just need to decide what to do
with each one.

antlr
cobertura
emma
hibernate
javacc
jdepend
jetty
jibx
nailgun
openjpa
xmlbeans

Assaf

>
> I can help but I don't have much experience with Gem packaging yet.  If
> there's a good example I can learn from, I can probably port the other
> plugins and write some doc.
>
> alex
>
>
> On Mon, Oct 6, 2008 at 9:12 AM, Assaf Arkin <arkin@intalio.com> wrote:
>
>> On Sun, Oct 5, 2008 at 4:51 PM, Alex Boisvert <boisvert@intalio.com>
>> wrote:
>> > How about "addon" for optional plugins that have tests and are officially
>> > supported and "experimental" for the rest?
>>
>> As of 1.3.0 we have a wonderful mechanism that allows you to package
>> extensions as separate Gems and require them in your buildfile, so
>> there's no need for either addon or experimental.  If it's too
>> specific to be part of core, spin it off to its own sub-project and
>> gem.
>>
>> Assaf
>>
>> >
>> > alex
>> >
>> >
>> > On Mon, Oct 6, 2008 at 4:32 AM, lacton <lacton@users.sourceforge.net>
>> wrote:
>> >
>> >> On Thu, Oct 2, 2008 at 12:15 AM, Assaf Arkin <arkin@intalio.com> wrote:
>> >> > The reason I didn't include addon to begin with is that everything
>> >> > there is (or was) stuff that fell out of lib: not as well maintained,
>> >> > documented, tested or committed to.
>> >> >
>> >> > I wasn't expecting it to have full or for that matter any test
>> >> > coverage, but rather for some parts to mature and either move to lib,
>> >> > or collected into separate gems (e.g. buildr-coverage).
>> >> >
>> >> > Not sure if we should keep this policy, but if we do, let's move Emma
>> >> > and Cobertura to lib.
>> >>
>> >> Moving Emma and Cobertura to lib is fine with me.
>> >>
>> >> One thing I'd like to keep is that the extension should be loaded only
>> >> if required by the user or the buildfile.  Right now, the way the
>> >> Emma/Cobertura extensions work is to add the test coverage tool to the
>> >> test task's dependencies and to add the instrumentation step before
>> >> testing.  I don't want to penalize users that don't want to measure
>> >> their test coverage.
>> >>
>> >> My understanding is that, currently, everything in lib is required
>> >> during startup.  Should we add an 'optional import' directory in lib?
>> >>
>> >> Lacton
>> >>
>> >
>>
>

Mime
View raw message