buildr-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Alex Boisvert" <boisv...@intalio.com>
Subject Re: Scala and Jetty support in Buildr 1.3
Date Wed, 13 Feb 2008 14:49:03 GMT
Hi John,

Looks like your message was truncated or incomplete.  Care to repost?

alex


On 2/12/08, John Layton <jlayton@thoughtworks.com> wrote:
>
>  Assaf,
>
>
>
> I'm not sure if this is appropriate, however on playing with the HEAD
> revision of trunk I noticed that..
>
>    1. JettyWrapper.java needs a package declaration
>    2. Scala compilation was only possible for me when the Scalac class
>    method for the dependencies was modified from;
>
>
>
> John Layton
>
>
>
> Developer, ThoughtWorks Australia
>
>
>
>  Email:: jlayton@thoughtworks.com
>
> Office:: +61396916500
>
> Mobile:: +61422715180
>
>  Yahoo:: johnstewartlayton
>
>
>
> Level 11, 155 Queens Street,
>
> Melbourne, VIC, 3001
>   ------------------------------
>
> *From:* "Assaf Arkin" <arkin@intalio.com> [mailto:"Assaf Arkin" <
> arkin@intalio.com>]
> *Sent:* Friday, February 08, 2008 11:29 AM
> *To:* buildr-user@incubator.apache.org
> *Subject:* Re: Example of checks (specifically on test.classes)
>
>
>
> On 2/6/08, David Saff < david@saff.net> wrote:
> >
> > Sorry for the late appreciation, but that cleared things up for me.
> >
> > Is it inappropriate to use check for things like asserting that some
> > tests are run?
>
>
>
> You can do that, but be careful, checks will be run even if tests are not
> run (build package test=no) and before integration tests are run.
>
>
> You'll probably want to check on the conditions that:
> Buildr.options.test && !test.options[:integration]
>
>
> Assaf
>
> David Saff
> >
> > On Jan 31, 2008 7:22 PM, Assaf Arkin < arkin@intalio.com> wrote:
> > > David,
> > >
> > > The check task is intended for, amongst other things, verify that your
>
> > > packages have the right contents. It runs from the package task, so
> try
> > > this:
> > >
> > > $ buildr package
> > >
> > > Assaf
> > >
> > >
> > > On 1/31/08, David Saff < david@saff.net> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > All,
> > > >
> > > > I'm trying to restrict the test classes run by my project (which is
> > > > JUnit itself), but still make sure that something is run. Right now,
>
> > > > I'm trying the following, and the check doesn't appear to fail, even
>
> > > > through no tests appear to be running:
> > > >
> > > > desc "The Junit project"
> > > > define "junit" do
> > > > project.version = VERSION_NUMBER
> > > > project.group = GROUP
> > > > manifest["Implementation-Vendor"] = COPYRIGHT
> > > > compile.with 'lib/hamcrest-core-1.1.jar' # Add classpath
> > dependencies
> > > > test.compile.with # Add classpath dependencies
> > > > test.include "org.junit.tests.AllTests"
> > > > package(:jar)
> > > > check test.classes do
> > > > it.should_not be_empty
> > > > end
> > > > end
> > > >
> > > > My output is:
> > > >
> > > > (in /Users/saff/Documents/workspaces/junit/junit)
> > > > Building junit
> > > > Compiling 122 source files in junit:compile
> > > > Testing junit
> > > > Compiling 124 source files in junit:test:compile
> > > >
> > > > I've purposely broken one of the tests, so I know they're not just
> > > > silently passing. AllTests is the suite that should include all of
> > > > the tests I actually want to run. I'm about 24 hours old as a buildr
>
> > > > initiate, so gentle reproof appreciated. Thanks,
> > > >
> > > > David Saff
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > CTO, Intalio
> > > http://www.intalio.com
> > >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> CTO, Intalio
> http://www.intalio.com
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message