]
Nick Boldt updated JBIDE-18985:
-------------------------------
Fix Version/s: 4.3.0.Beta2
(was: 4.3.0.Beta1)
provide tool to audit BUILD_ALIAS in feature qualifiers when
aggregated
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Key: JBIDE-18985
URL:
https://issues.jboss.org/browse/JBIDE-18985
Project: Tools (JBoss Tools)
Issue Type: Feature Request
Components: build, updatesite
Affects Versions: 4.3.0.Alpha1
Reporter: Nick Boldt
Assignee: Nick Boldt
Fix For: 4.3.0.Beta2
Based on discussion {quote}Do you have a test for "expected BUILD_ALIAS value in
feature qualifiers" ?{quote}
Some tests we can run (forgive this pseudocode):
{code}
// for builds up to a x.y.0 release
if ((BUILD_ALIAS in (Alpha*, Beta*, CR*) and jbosstools.version endsWith(".0"))
{
// make sure all features end in the same BUILD_ALIAS, or Final
// if anything doesn't match WARN (want a build to be yellow, not red)
}
{code}
{code}
// for GA builds and followup maintenance
if ((BUILD_ALIAS in (Final, GA)) {
// make sure all com.* features end in GA, and all others end in Final
// if anything doesn't match FAIL (want a build to be red)
}
{code}
Once we have that coded, perhaps into a maven enforcer plugin?, we can fine tune it for
cases like where Freemarker does an update in Alpha and then does nothing for 4 months,
waiting for CR/GA.
Should they have to keep updating their root pom just so the BUILD_ALIAS matches and
they're building against the correct target platform?
Or, should their code remain dormant, but their job's config.xml be updated to
override the BUILD_ALIAS & TARGET_PLATFORM values to the correct versions?