-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 156
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
#960 Ensure release tag is valid and is higher than previous release tags #1014
Conversation
@gumbelmj Thanks, let me find someone who can review this pull request |
@HDouss plz review this pull request when possible |
* @throws IOException In case of error. | ||
*/ | ||
@Test | ||
public void tooOldRelease() throws IOException { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@gumbelmj Let's use verbs here, for example rejectsOldRelease
@gumbelmj Please see several comments from me. |
@HDouss I've addressed your comments. Thanks for the feedback. |
<version>3.0.3</version> | ||
</dependency> | ||
<dependency> | ||
<groupId>org.powermock</groupId> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@gumbelmj May be it is not a good idea to add a new mocking framework here. You should ask the architect. I suggest to remove the dependency and remove testing private methods.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@gumbelmj The architect fully agrees with the above.
- Testing private methods is entirely unacceptable
- The need for doing so simply indicates bad design choices
- As a consequence in this case but also in general:
- We should not add any new mock framework to Rultor ever, see http://www.yegor256.com/2014/09/23/built-in-fake-objects.html
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@gumbelmj Ok. So let's get rid of it as I said, and modify the tests as I suggested.
…ing and check for invalid tags properly
@original-brownbear and @HDouss I've addressed the comments and remove the testing of the private static methods. |
@gumbelmj this branch is failing CI now. |
@original-brownbear I'm working to address those. |
@original-brownbear this is passing CI now |
@gumbelmj Thanks. |
@rultor merge. |
@HDouss Thanks for your request. @original-brownbear Please confirm this. |
<dependency> | ||
<groupId>org.apache.maven</groupId> | ||
<artifactId>maven-artifact</artifactId> | ||
<version>3.0.3</version> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@gumbelmj There is a significant number of issues in the above. |
…l tests of invalid tags
@alex-palevsky please close this. |
@original-brownbear issue closes as you just asked |
@HDouss since quality is good, I just added 10 mins to @original-brownbear (our architect) in transaction AP-08C36882K7091032G Thanks for your contribution, 15 mins was added to your account, payment ID is added +15 to your rating, now it is equal to +3111 |
#960 Ensure release tag is valid and is higher than previous release tags