| Re: [gmf-dev] Re: [FAILURE / 6 F, 178 W] GMF HEAD Build 2.2.0 /N200905050649 done [07:43] |
Hi Rich,
We're good for M7 I think. The JUnits are fixed (https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=275209)
Cheers,
Alex
Oleksandr Boyko---06/05/2009 12:12:29 PM---Hi Rich,
Oleksandr Boyko/Ottawa/IBM@IBMCA
Sent by: gmf-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx 06/05/2009 12:06 PM Please respond to
"GMF Project developer discussions." <gmf-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>To
"GMF Project developer discussions." <gmf-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
cc
Subject
Re: [gmf-dev] Re: [FAILURE / 6 F, 178 W] GMF HEAD Build 2.2.0 /N200905050649 done [07:43]
Hi Rich,
No the fix is there. Those 5 tests fail because EMF fails to resolve the ePackage in the registry when you call XXPackage.eINSTANCE - need to regenerate notation model. See bug https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=270870 <https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=270870>
I'll let you know when regenerated notation is in CVS.
Cheers,
Alex
Richard Gronback ---06/05/2009 11:54:20 AM---OK, thanks Artem.
Please respond to
Richard Gronback <richard.gronback@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent by: gmf-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx 06/05/2009 11:52 AM
"GMF Project developer discussions." <gmf-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>To
"GMF Project developer discussions." <gmf-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>cc
Subject
Re: [gmf-dev] Re: [FAILURE / 6 F, 178 W] GMF HEAD Build 2.2.0 /N200905050649 done [07:43]
OK, thanks Artem.
Alex, are you sure the bug you referenced was for these failures, and that it was actually committed?
I’ll be offline for a bit, but will build M7 later this afternoon or this evening.
Thanks,
Rich
On 5/6/09 11:47 AM, "Artem Tikhomirov" <Artem.Tikhomirov@xxxxxxxxxxx <Artem.Tikhomirov@xxxxxxxxxxx> > wrote:
And, btw, diagram.ui tests fail for me on Windows. Same 5 that fail on the build machine. All GMF plugins are from HEAD.
From: gmf-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx <gmf-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx> [mailto:gmf-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:gmf-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx> ] On Behalf Of Artem Tikhomirov
Sent: Wednesday, May 06, 2009 5:33 PM
To: GMF Project developer discussions.
Subject: RE: [gmf-dev] Re: [FAILURE / 6 F,178 W] GMF HEAD Build 2.2.0 /N200905050649 done [07:43]
I've just committed the change, and the test should pass next time.
Artem
From: gmf-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx <gmf-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx> [mailto:gmf-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:gmf-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx> ] On Behalf Of Richard Gronback
Sent: Wednesday, May 06, 2009 5:24 PM
To: GMF Project developer discussions.
Subject: Re: [gmf-dev] Re: [FAILURE / 6 F, 178 W] GMF HEAD Build 2.2.0 /N200905050649 done [07:43]
Hi Alex,
What platform did you run these tests on, btw? Linux, or Windows?
Artem, any update on the one tooling test failure?
If we all have passing tests locally, anyone object to promoting an M7 build with test failures on the build machine?
Thanks,
Rich
On 5/5/09 12:05 PM, "Oleksandr Boyko" <Oleksandr_Boyko@xxxxxxxxxx <Oleksandr_Boyko@xxxxxxxxxx> > wrote:
Hi all,
I ran runtime.diagram.ui JUnits and they are all passing, including those 5 that failed for the build. Looking at the stack trace of the failures it looks a lot like the bug https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=266848 <https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=266848> that I fixed for M7. Is there a possibility that this fix is not included in the build somehow?
Cheers,
Alex
Richard Gronback ---05/05/2009 08:56:39 AM---It seems we're still waiting on EMF QTV, M2M QVT, and OCL M7 builds.
Richard Gronback <richard.gronback@xxxxxxxxxxx <richard.gronback@xxxxxxxxxxx> >
Sent by: gmf-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx <gmf-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx> 05/05/2009 08:54 AM Please respond to
"GMF Project developer discussions." <gmf-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx <gmf-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx> >
To
"GMF Project developer discussions." <gmf-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx <gmf-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx> >
cc
Subject
[gmf-dev] Re: [FAILURE / 6 F, 178 W] GMF HEAD Build 2.2.0 / N200905050649 done [07:43]
It seems we're still waiting on EMF QTV, M2M QVT, and OCL M7 builds.
Any updates on the test failures below?
Thanks,
Rich
On 5/5/09 7:43 AM, "GMF Build Team" <nickboldt@xxxxxxxxx <nickboldt@xxxxxxxxx> > wrote:
>
> Status:
> FAILURE / 6 F, 178 W
>
> JUnit Results:
> http://emft.eclipse.org/modeling/gmf/downloads/testResults.php?hl=1&project=gm <http://emft.eclipse.org/modeling/gmf/downloads/testResults.php?hl=1&project=gm>
> f&ID=2.2.0/N200905050649
>
> Build Log:
> http://emft.eclipse.org/modeling/gmf/build/log-viewer.php?project=gmf&build=2 <http://emft.eclipse.org/modeling/gmf/build/log-viewer.php?project=gmf&build=2> .
> 2.0/N200905050649/
>
> Build Details:
> http://emft.eclipse.org/modeling/gmf/downloads/?project=gmf&sortBy=date&hlbuil <http://emft.eclipse.org/modeling/gmf/downloads/?project=gmf&sortBy=date&hlbuil>
> d=N200905050649#N200905050649
>
> Status Check:
> http://emft.eclipse.org/modeling/build/checkBuildStatus.php?parent=modeling&to <http://emft.eclipse.org/modeling/build/checkBuildStatus.php?parent=modeling&to>
> p=gmf&project=gmf&version=2.2.0&buildID=N200905050649
>
>
_______________________________________________
gmf-dev mailing list
gmf-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx <gmf-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/gmf-dev <https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/gmf-dev>
_______________________________________________
gmf-dev mailing list
gmf-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx <gmf-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/gmf-dev <https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/gmf-dev>
_______________________________________________
gmf-dev mailing list
gmf-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx <gmf-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/gmf-dev <https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/gmf-dev> _______________________________________________
gmf-dev mailing list
gmf-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/gmf-dev <https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/gmf-dev>
(See attached file: pic06380.gif)_______________________________________________
gmf-dev mailing list
gmf-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/gmf-dev
_______________________________________________
gmf-dev mailing list
gmf-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/gmf-dev
