|The ultimate test, running it on windows :) I’m not totally surprised I don’t recall the last time tests were run on windows. Let me try it on my windows box. I imagine they are simply platform specific test related failures, I’m not expecting anything really broken. Thanks for trying it out !|
I was quite busy, but a few days ago I cloned the repo and successfully ran the build with "skip tests". I had to switch from JDK 11 to 8, though, because with Oracle JDK 11 there was some problem with generating Javadocs. I guess Maven did not find the generator. I have not looked into it, just wanted to make you aware of it.
Yesterday I ran a full build (mvn clean install) and had a test failure. I wanted to see if there were more failing tests on my Windows machine and just ran it again with -Dmaven.test.failure.ignore=true. The build completed after about 23 minutes on my machine and there were a couple more failures in one test class in addition to the failure I had seen before. I am attaching both Surefire logs here for you and just wanted to ask if these failures are currently to be expected due to some work in progress or platform-specific issue or if it is worth looking into that further.
Andrew Clement schrieb am 13.02.2019 05:37:
<org.aspectj.internal.lang.reflect.AjTypeTest.txt><org.aspectj.tests.TestsModuleTests.txt>_______________________________________________aspectj-users mailing listaspectj-users@xxxxxxxxxxxTo change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visithttps://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/aspectj-users
One question, just in case: Would PRs against the GitHub repo be okay?
Yes, I think so. But there are some shenanigans necessary to ensure the commit is signed off for easy acceptance, I discussed it in here with another guy who contributed that way - not even sure we got to a conclusion, but if they are signed off in an easy form for me to integrate, that’ll obviously reduce the time they take to process.
Great news, Andy, thank you so much. This weekend or the next I guess Iwill take a look.One question, just in case: Would PRs against the GitHub repo be okay?Regards-- Alexander Kriegischhttps://scrum-master.deAndrew Clement schrieb am 12.02.2019 06:29:
It is alive. AspectJ, well overdue, now has as rudimentary maven_______________________________________________aspectj-users mailing listaspectj-users@xxxxxxxxxxxTo change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visithttps://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/aspectj-users
build. It builds on the few systems I’ve tried it on although some
of the tests seem to be a bit flaky on windows (I’ve not run the
tests on windows for a long time so I don’t think it is due to the
maven process, it just never used to be this easy to run them on a
different OS). If anyone wants to help polish it, please do, I’m not
a maven guru. There are some of the jar dependencies that need
converting from local jar references to real dependencies from a
repository but I haven’t had a chance to work out the exact version
numbers. You can ‘mvn install’ and it will build
aspectjrt/aspectjweaver/aspectjtools and then you can consume them
from your local repo (although the poms need a bit of work). There is
an installer project that builds the installer distribution we also
make available. I’ve imported it into eclipse using m2e, I haven’t
tried it with IntelliJ - I’d be interested to know if that works.
If nothing else this may make it easier for folks to consume snapshot
builds that include workarounds or early fixes as they can more easily
build/install it locally now.
If anyone wants to try it out, please do, raise bugs, contribute fixes
There are extra benefits I snuck in:
-- I deleted the projects ending in ‘5’ (created when Java5 was
separate to Java 1.4) and merged them into the non 5 variants.
-- bcel-builder is no longer a ’special project’ you had to
build separately. It is just a regular sub-module
-- If you do want to run the tests in eclipse, I added a few lines
explanation in the new README at
I guess the true test of this will be when I try to use it to release
1.9.3 but as it produces the same artifacts, I should be able to use
the same release process there.