surefire plugin output changes

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
11 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

surefire plugin output changes

John Dix
Hello all,

We have migrated our maven from version 3.0.3 to 3.0.5 and our developers are claiming now that they're not seeing the verbosity in the test outputs like they did before.

The only see a synopsis and summary of the number of tests run, failed, and which ones failed. Servers are run in a CentOS 5.3 linux environment within Jenkins.

I am being told that before this upgrade they had an extremely chatty output like below. What they haven't been able to confirm for me is whether this change happened after we moved from 2.1.0 to 3.0.3 or not as that was before my time.

Can anyone please confirm if this output was/is handled by surefire and maybe a commandline switch in maven got lost, or from somewhere else? The output as from an old archived log the developer gave me.


[INFO ]: com.qpass.payment.multinodeCloud.DeployTest:
         Connected to Mission Control Server on ::  myWar from getWarUrl = mobilePaymentsApp-amp_i-SNAPSHOT.war
objname = ampait/ampait-control-1.opsdevna3.amdocsdc.net/5666/com.qpass:Type=Environment
[INFO ]: com.qpass.payment.multinodeCloud.DeployTest:
         Test: deployAppWartoSelectedsEnv Result={0}: {<machine-name>=Successfull Deployment of WAR file: app} [INFO ]: com.qpass.payment.multinodeCloud.DeployTest:
         Test:deployAppWar: Time Spent 2 min 24 secs 324 ms myWar from getWarUrl = mobilePaymentExtractsApp-amp_i-SNAPSHOT.war
[INFO ]: com.qpass.payment.multinodeCloud.DeployTest:
         Test: deployExtractsWar Result={0}: {ampait-back-1.opsdevna3.amdocsdc.net:8999=Successfull Deployment of WAR file: extractsApp} [INFO ]: com.qpass.payment.multinodeCloud.DeployTest:
         Test:deployExtractsWar: Time Spent 1 min 23 secs 14 ms myWar from getWarUrl = nxtcomSampleApp-amp_i-SNAPSHOT.war
[INFO ]: com.qpass.payment.multinodeCloud.DeployTest:
         Test: deployNxtSampleWar Result={0}: {ampait-back-1.opsdevna3.amdocsdc.net:8999=Successfull Deployment of WAR file: nxtcomServices} [INFO ]: com.qpass.payment.multinodeCloud.DeployTest:
         Test:deployNxtSampleWar: Time Spent 47 secs 410 ms myWar from getWarUrl = zmobileSampleApp-amp_i-SNAPSHOT.war
[INFO ]: com.qpass.payment.multinodeCloud.DeployTest:
         Test: deployZmobileSampleWar Result={0}: {ampait-back-1.opsdevna3.amdocsdc.net:8999=Successfull Deployment of WAR file: zmobileServices} [INFO ]: com.qpass.payment.multinodeCloud.DeployTest:
         Test:deployZmobileSampleWar: Time Spent 31 secs 400 ms myWar from getWarUrl = mobilePaymentsWebServiceApp-amp_i-SNAPSHOT.war
[INFO ]: com.qpass.payment.multinodeCloud.DeployTest:
         Test: deployWebServiceApp Result={0}: {ampait-front-1.opsdevna3.amdocsdc.net:8999=Successfull Deployment of WAR file: ROOT} [INFO ]: com.qpass.payment.multinodeCloud.DeployTest:
         Test:deployBackWarToSelectedEnv: Time Spent 1 min 33 secs 791 ms myWar from getWarUrl = paymentsReportingUiApplication-amp_i-SNAPSHOT.war

This message and the information contained herein is proprietary and confidential and subject to the Amdocs policy statement,
you may review at http://www.amdocs.com/email_disclaimer.asp

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

RE: surefire plugin output changes

John Dix
I should point out that I have run 3.0.3 against the build in question and I still received the same non-verbose output they are complaining about. At a loss at what to tell them other than a shoulder shrug and "idunno" I thought I would ask here to see if there was a change somewhere that could account for this.

-----Original Message-----
From: John Dix
Sent: Monday, January 27, 2014 4:35 PM
To: Maven Users List
Subject: surefire plugin output changes

Hello all,

We have migrated our maven from version 3.0.3 to 3.0.5 and our developers are claiming now that they're not seeing the verbosity in the test outputs like they did before.

The only see a synopsis and summary of the number of tests run, failed, and which ones failed. Servers are run in a CentOS 5.3 linux environment within Jenkins.

I am being told that before this upgrade they had an extremely chatty output like below. What they haven't been able to confirm for me is whether this change happened after we moved from 2.1.0 to 3.0.3 or not as that was before my time.

Can anyone please confirm if this output was/is handled by surefire and maybe a commandline switch in maven got lost, or from somewhere else? The output as from an old archived log the developer gave me.


[INFO ]: com.qpass.payment.multinodeCloud.DeployTest:
         Connected to Mission Control Server on ::  myWar from getWarUrl = mobilePaymentsApp-amp_i-SNAPSHOT.war
objname = ampait/ampait-control-1.opsdevna3.amdocsdc.net/5666/com.qpass:Type=Environment
[INFO ]: com.qpass.payment.multinodeCloud.DeployTest:
         Test: deployAppWartoSelectedsEnv Result={0}: {<machine-name>=Successfull Deployment of WAR file: app} [INFO ]: com.qpass.payment.multinodeCloud.DeployTest:
         Test:deployAppWar: Time Spent 2 min 24 secs 324 ms myWar from getWarUrl = mobilePaymentExtractsApp-amp_i-SNAPSHOT.war
[INFO ]: com.qpass.payment.multinodeCloud.DeployTest:
         Test: deployExtractsWar Result={0}: {ampait-back-1.opsdevna3.amdocsdc.net:8999=Successfull Deployment of WAR file: extractsApp} [INFO ]: com.qpass.payment.multinodeCloud.DeployTest:
         Test:deployExtractsWar: Time Spent 1 min 23 secs 14 ms myWar from getWarUrl = nxtcomSampleApp-amp_i-SNAPSHOT.war
[INFO ]: com.qpass.payment.multinodeCloud.DeployTest:
         Test: deployNxtSampleWar Result={0}: {ampait-back-1.opsdevna3.amdocsdc.net:8999=Successfull Deployment of WAR file: nxtcomServices} [INFO ]: com.qpass.payment.multinodeCloud.DeployTest:
         Test:deployNxtSampleWar: Time Spent 47 secs 410 ms myWar from getWarUrl = zmobileSampleApp-amp_i-SNAPSHOT.war
[INFO ]: com.qpass.payment.multinodeCloud.DeployTest:
         Test: deployZmobileSampleWar Result={0}: {ampait-back-1.opsdevna3.amdocsdc.net:8999=Successfull Deployment of WAR file: zmobileServices} [INFO ]: com.qpass.payment.multinodeCloud.DeployTest:
         Test:deployZmobileSampleWar: Time Spent 31 secs 400 ms myWar from getWarUrl = mobilePaymentsWebServiceApp-amp_i-SNAPSHOT.war
[INFO ]: com.qpass.payment.multinodeCloud.DeployTest:
         Test: deployWebServiceApp Result={0}: {ampait-front-1.opsdevna3.amdocsdc.net:8999=Successfull Deployment of WAR file: ROOT} [INFO ]: com.qpass.payment.multinodeCloud.DeployTest:
         Test:deployBackWarToSelectedEnv: Time Spent 1 min 33 secs 791 ms myWar from getWarUrl = paymentsReportingUiApplication-amp_i-SNAPSHOT.war

This message and the information contained herein is proprietary and confidential and subject to the Amdocs policy statement, you may review at http://www.amdocs.com/email_disclaimer.asp

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: surefire plugin output changes

stephenconnolly
3.0.3 defaulted to surefire 2.7.2 if you did not specify a version

3.0.4 and 3.0.5 default to surefire 2.10

3.1.1 defaults surefire to 2.12.4

HTH


On 28 January 2014 00:52, John Dix <[hidden email]> wrote:

> I should point out that I have run 3.0.3 against the build in question and
> I still received the same non-verbose output they are complaining about. At
> a loss at what to tell them other than a shoulder shrug and "idunno" I
> thought I would ask here to see if there was a change somewhere that could
> account for this.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: John Dix
> Sent: Monday, January 27, 2014 4:35 PM
> To: Maven Users List
> Subject: surefire plugin output changes
>
> Hello all,
>
> We have migrated our maven from version 3.0.3 to 3.0.5 and our developers
> are claiming now that they're not seeing the verbosity in the test outputs
> like they did before.
>
> The only see a synopsis and summary of the number of tests run, failed,
> and which ones failed. Servers are run in a CentOS 5.3 linux environment
> within Jenkins.
>
> I am being told that before this upgrade they had an extremely chatty
> output like below. What they haven't been able to confirm for me is whether
> this change happened after we moved from 2.1.0 to 3.0.3 or not as that was
> before my time.
>
> Can anyone please confirm if this output was/is handled by surefire and
> maybe a commandline switch in maven got lost, or from somewhere else? The
> output as from an old archived log the developer gave me.
>
>
> [INFO ]: com.qpass.payment.multinodeCloud.DeployTest:
>          Connected to Mission Control Server on ::  myWar from getWarUrl =
> mobilePaymentsApp-amp_i-SNAPSHOT.war
> objname = ampait/
> ampait-control-1.opsdevna3.amdocsdc.net/5666/com.qpass:Type=Environment
> [INFO ]: com.qpass.payment.multinodeCloud.DeployTest:
>          Test: deployAppWartoSelectedsEnv Result={0}:
> {<machine-name>=Successfull Deployment of WAR file: app} [INFO ]:
> com.qpass.payment.multinodeCloud.DeployTest:
>          Test:deployAppWar: Time Spent 2 min 24 secs 324 ms myWar from
> getWarUrl = mobilePaymentExtractsApp-amp_i-SNAPSHOT.war
> [INFO ]: com.qpass.payment.multinodeCloud.DeployTest:
>          Test: deployExtractsWar Result={0}:
> {ampait-back-1.opsdevna3.amdocsdc.net:8999=Successfull Deployment of WAR
> file: extractsApp} [INFO ]: com.qpass.payment.multinodeCloud.DeployTest:
>          Test:deployExtractsWar: Time Spent 1 min 23 secs 14 ms myWar from
> getWarUrl = nxtcomSampleApp-amp_i-SNAPSHOT.war
> [INFO ]: com.qpass.payment.multinodeCloud.DeployTest:
>          Test: deployNxtSampleWar Result={0}:
> {ampait-back-1.opsdevna3.amdocsdc.net:8999=Successfull Deployment of WAR
> file: nxtcomServices} [INFO ]: com.qpass.payment.multinodeCloud.DeployTest:
>          Test:deployNxtSampleWar: Time Spent 47 secs 410 ms myWar from
> getWarUrl = zmobileSampleApp-amp_i-SNAPSHOT.war
> [INFO ]: com.qpass.payment.multinodeCloud.DeployTest:
>          Test: deployZmobileSampleWar Result={0}:
> {ampait-back-1.opsdevna3.amdocsdc.net:8999=Successfull Deployment of WAR
> file: zmobileServices} [INFO ]: com.qpass.payment.multinodeCloud.DeployTest:
>          Test:deployZmobileSampleWar: Time Spent 31 secs 400 ms myWar from
> getWarUrl = mobilePaymentsWebServiceApp-amp_i-SNAPSHOT.war
> [INFO ]: com.qpass.payment.multinodeCloud.DeployTest:
>          Test: deployWebServiceApp Result={0}:
> {ampait-front-1.opsdevna3.amdocsdc.net:8999=Successfull Deployment of WAR
> file: ROOT} [INFO ]: com.qpass.payment.multinodeCloud.DeployTest:
>          Test:deployBackWarToSelectedEnv: Time Spent 1 min 33 secs 791 ms
> myWar from getWarUrl = paymentsReportingUiApplication-amp_i-SNAPSHOT.war
>
> This message and the information contained herein is proprietary and
> confidential and subject to the Amdocs policy statement, you may review at
> http://www.amdocs.com/email_disclaimer.asp
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>
>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

RE: surefire plugin output changes

John Dix
Do you know which version Maven 2.1.0 had?


-----Original Message-----
From: Stephen Connolly [mailto:[hidden email]]
Sent: Tuesday, January 28, 2014 12:56 AM
To: Maven Users List
Subject: Re: surefire plugin output changes

3.0.3 defaulted to surefire 2.7.2 if you did not specify a version

3.0.4 and 3.0.5 default to surefire 2.10

3.1.1 defaults surefire to 2.12.4

HTH


On 28 January 2014 00:52, John Dix <[hidden email]> wrote:

> I should point out that I have run 3.0.3 against the build in question
> and I still received the same non-verbose output they are complaining
> about. At a loss at what to tell them other than a shoulder shrug and
> "idunno" I thought I would ask here to see if there was a change
> somewhere that could account for this.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: John Dix
> Sent: Monday, January 27, 2014 4:35 PM
> To: Maven Users List
> Subject: surefire plugin output changes
>
> Hello all,
>
> We have migrated our maven from version 3.0.3 to 3.0.5 and our
> developers are claiming now that they're not seeing the verbosity in
> the test outputs like they did before.
>
> The only see a synopsis and summary of the number of tests run,
> failed, and which ones failed. Servers are run in a CentOS 5.3 linux
> environment within Jenkins.
>
> I am being told that before this upgrade they had an extremely chatty
> output like below. What they haven't been able to confirm for me is
> whether this change happened after we moved from 2.1.0 to 3.0.3 or not
> as that was before my time.
>
> Can anyone please confirm if this output was/is handled by surefire
> and maybe a commandline switch in maven got lost, or from somewhere
> else? The output as from an old archived log the developer gave me.
>
>
> [INFO ]: com.qpass.payment.multinodeCloud.DeployTest:
>          Connected to Mission Control Server on ::  myWar from
> getWarUrl = mobilePaymentsApp-amp_i-SNAPSHOT.war
> objname = ampait/
> ampait-control-1.opsdevna3.amdocsdc.net/5666/com.qpass:Type=Environmen
> t [INFO ]: com.qpass.payment.multinodeCloud.DeployTest:
>          Test: deployAppWartoSelectedsEnv Result={0}:
> {<machine-name>=Successfull Deployment of WAR file: app} [INFO ]:
> com.qpass.payment.multinodeCloud.DeployTest:
>          Test:deployAppWar: Time Spent 2 min 24 secs 324 ms myWar from
> getWarUrl = mobilePaymentExtractsApp-amp_i-SNAPSHOT.war
> [INFO ]: com.qpass.payment.multinodeCloud.DeployTest:
>          Test: deployExtractsWar Result={0}:
> {ampait-back-1.opsdevna3.amdocsdc.net:8999=Successfull Deployment of
> WAR
> file: extractsApp} [INFO ]: com.qpass.payment.multinodeCloud.DeployTest:
>          Test:deployExtractsWar: Time Spent 1 min 23 secs 14 ms myWar
> from getWarUrl = nxtcomSampleApp-amp_i-SNAPSHOT.war
> [INFO ]: com.qpass.payment.multinodeCloud.DeployTest:
>          Test: deployNxtSampleWar Result={0}:
> {ampait-back-1.opsdevna3.amdocsdc.net:8999=Successfull Deployment of
> WAR
> file: nxtcomServices} [INFO ]: com.qpass.payment.multinodeCloud.DeployTest:
>          Test:deployNxtSampleWar: Time Spent 47 secs 410 ms myWar from
> getWarUrl = zmobileSampleApp-amp_i-SNAPSHOT.war
> [INFO ]: com.qpass.payment.multinodeCloud.DeployTest:
>          Test: deployZmobileSampleWar Result={0}:
> {ampait-back-1.opsdevna3.amdocsdc.net:8999=Successfull Deployment of
> WAR
> file: zmobileServices} [INFO ]: com.qpass.payment.multinodeCloud.DeployTest:
>          Test:deployZmobileSampleWar: Time Spent 31 secs 400 ms myWar
> from getWarUrl = mobilePaymentsWebServiceApp-amp_i-SNAPSHOT.war
> [INFO ]: com.qpass.payment.multinodeCloud.DeployTest:
>          Test: deployWebServiceApp Result={0}:
> {ampait-front-1.opsdevna3.amdocsdc.net:8999=Successfull Deployment of
> WAR
> file: ROOT} [INFO ]: com.qpass.payment.multinodeCloud.DeployTest:
>          Test:deployBackWarToSelectedEnv: Time Spent 1 min 33 secs 791
> ms myWar from getWarUrl =
> paymentsReportingUiApplication-amp_i-SNAPSHOT.war
>
> This message and the information contained herein is proprietary and
> confidential and subject to the Amdocs policy statement, you may
> review at http://www.amdocs.com/email_disclaimer.asp
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>
>

This message and the information contained herein is proprietary and confidential and subject to the Amdocs policy statement,
you may review at http://www.amdocs.com/email_disclaimer.asp

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

RE: surefire plugin output changes

John Dix
I got it... 2.16

-----Original Message-----
From: John Dix
Sent: Tuesday, January 28, 2014 9:45 AM
To: Maven Users List
Subject: RE: surefire plugin output changes

Do you know which version Maven 2.1.0 had?


-----Original Message-----
From: Stephen Connolly [mailto:[hidden email]]
Sent: Tuesday, January 28, 2014 12:56 AM
To: Maven Users List
Subject: Re: surefire plugin output changes

3.0.3 defaulted to surefire 2.7.2 if you did not specify a version

3.0.4 and 3.0.5 default to surefire 2.10

3.1.1 defaults surefire to 2.12.4

HTH


On 28 January 2014 00:52, John Dix <[hidden email]> wrote:

> I should point out that I have run 3.0.3 against the build in question
> and I still received the same non-verbose output they are complaining
> about. At a loss at what to tell them other than a shoulder shrug and
> "idunno" I thought I would ask here to see if there was a change
> somewhere that could account for this.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: John Dix
> Sent: Monday, January 27, 2014 4:35 PM
> To: Maven Users List
> Subject: surefire plugin output changes
>
> Hello all,
>
> We have migrated our maven from version 3.0.3 to 3.0.5 and our
> developers are claiming now that they're not seeing the verbosity in
> the test outputs like they did before.
>
> The only see a synopsis and summary of the number of tests run,
> failed, and which ones failed. Servers are run in a CentOS 5.3 linux
> environment within Jenkins.
>
> I am being told that before this upgrade they had an extremely chatty
> output like below. What they haven't been able to confirm for me is
> whether this change happened after we moved from 2.1.0 to 3.0.3 or not
> as that was before my time.
>
> Can anyone please confirm if this output was/is handled by surefire
> and maybe a commandline switch in maven got lost, or from somewhere
> else? The output as from an old archived log the developer gave me.
>
>
> [INFO ]: com.qpass.payment.multinodeCloud.DeployTest:
>          Connected to Mission Control Server on ::  myWar from
> getWarUrl = mobilePaymentsApp-amp_i-SNAPSHOT.war
> objname = ampait/
> ampait-control-1.opsdevna3.amdocsdc.net/5666/com.qpass:Type=Environmen
> t [INFO ]: com.qpass.payment.multinodeCloud.DeployTest:
>          Test: deployAppWartoSelectedsEnv Result={0}:
> {<machine-name>=Successfull Deployment of WAR file: app} [INFO ]:
> com.qpass.payment.multinodeCloud.DeployTest:
>          Test:deployAppWar: Time Spent 2 min 24 secs 324 ms myWar from
> getWarUrl = mobilePaymentExtractsApp-amp_i-SNAPSHOT.war
> [INFO ]: com.qpass.payment.multinodeCloud.DeployTest:
>          Test: deployExtractsWar Result={0}:
> {ampait-back-1.opsdevna3.amdocsdc.net:8999=Successfull Deployment of
> WAR
> file: extractsApp} [INFO ]: com.qpass.payment.multinodeCloud.DeployTest:
>          Test:deployExtractsWar: Time Spent 1 min 23 secs 14 ms myWar
> from getWarUrl = nxtcomSampleApp-amp_i-SNAPSHOT.war
> [INFO ]: com.qpass.payment.multinodeCloud.DeployTest:
>          Test: deployNxtSampleWar Result={0}:
> {ampait-back-1.opsdevna3.amdocsdc.net:8999=Successfull Deployment of
> WAR
> file: nxtcomServices} [INFO ]: com.qpass.payment.multinodeCloud.DeployTest:
>          Test:deployNxtSampleWar: Time Spent 47 secs 410 ms myWar from
> getWarUrl = zmobileSampleApp-amp_i-SNAPSHOT.war
> [INFO ]: com.qpass.payment.multinodeCloud.DeployTest:
>          Test: deployZmobileSampleWar Result={0}:
> {ampait-back-1.opsdevna3.amdocsdc.net:8999=Successfull Deployment of
> WAR
> file: zmobileServices} [INFO ]: com.qpass.payment.multinodeCloud.DeployTest:
>          Test:deployZmobileSampleWar: Time Spent 31 secs 400 ms myWar
> from getWarUrl = mobilePaymentsWebServiceApp-amp_i-SNAPSHOT.war
> [INFO ]: com.qpass.payment.multinodeCloud.DeployTest:
>          Test: deployWebServiceApp Result={0}:
> {ampait-front-1.opsdevna3.amdocsdc.net:8999=Successfull Deployment of
> WAR
> file: ROOT} [INFO ]: com.qpass.payment.multinodeCloud.DeployTest:
>          Test:deployBackWarToSelectedEnv: Time Spent 1 min 33 secs 791
> ms myWar from getWarUrl =
> paymentsReportingUiApplication-amp_i-SNAPSHOT.war
>
> This message and the information contained herein is proprietary and
> confidential and subject to the Amdocs policy statement, you may
> review at http://www.amdocs.com/email_disclaimer.asp
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>
>

This message and the information contained herein is proprietary and confidential and subject to the Amdocs policy statement, you may review at http://www.amdocs.com/email_disclaimer.asp

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: surefire plugin output changes

ljnelson
No, that's the latest version of maven-surefire-plugin.

Run mvn help:effective-pom from a pom.xml in your project and look for the
stanza that concerns the maven-surefire-plugin and that will tell you for
sure.

Best,
Laird


On Tue, Jan 28, 2014 at 10:06 AM, John Dix <[hidden email]> wrote:

> I got it... 2.16
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: John Dix
> Sent: Tuesday, January 28, 2014 9:45 AM
> To: Maven Users List
> Subject: RE: surefire plugin output changes
>
> Do you know which version Maven 2.1.0 had?
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Stephen Connolly [mailto:[hidden email]]
> Sent: Tuesday, January 28, 2014 12:56 AM
> To: Maven Users List
> Subject: Re: surefire plugin output changes
>
> 3.0.3 defaulted to surefire 2.7.2 if you did not specify a version
>
> 3.0.4 and 3.0.5 default to surefire 2.10
>
> 3.1.1 defaults surefire to 2.12.4
>
> HTH
>
>
> On 28 January 2014 00:52, John Dix <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> > I should point out that I have run 3.0.3 against the build in question
> > and I still received the same non-verbose output they are complaining
> > about. At a loss at what to tell them other than a shoulder shrug and
> > "idunno" I thought I would ask here to see if there was a change
> > somewhere that could account for this.
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: John Dix
> > Sent: Monday, January 27, 2014 4:35 PM
> > To: Maven Users List
> > Subject: surefire plugin output changes
> >
> > Hello all,
> >
> > We have migrated our maven from version 3.0.3 to 3.0.5 and our
> > developers are claiming now that they're not seeing the verbosity in
> > the test outputs like they did before.
> >
> > The only see a synopsis and summary of the number of tests run,
> > failed, and which ones failed. Servers are run in a CentOS 5.3 linux
> > environment within Jenkins.
> >
> > I am being told that before this upgrade they had an extremely chatty
> > output like below. What they haven't been able to confirm for me is
> > whether this change happened after we moved from 2.1.0 to 3.0.3 or not
> > as that was before my time.
> >
> > Can anyone please confirm if this output was/is handled by surefire
> > and maybe a commandline switch in maven got lost, or from somewhere
> > else? The output as from an old archived log the developer gave me.
> >
> >
> > [INFO ]: com.qpass.payment.multinodeCloud.DeployTest:
> >          Connected to Mission Control Server on ::  myWar from
> > getWarUrl = mobilePaymentsApp-amp_i-SNAPSHOT.war
> > objname = ampait/
> > ampait-control-1.opsdevna3.amdocsdc.net/5666/com.qpass:Type=Environmen
> > t [INFO ]: com.qpass.payment.multinodeCloud.DeployTest:
> >          Test: deployAppWartoSelectedsEnv Result={0}:
> > {<machine-name>=Successfull Deployment of WAR file: app} [INFO ]:
> > com.qpass.payment.multinodeCloud.DeployTest:
> >          Test:deployAppWar: Time Spent 2 min 24 secs 324 ms myWar from
> > getWarUrl = mobilePaymentExtractsApp-amp_i-SNAPSHOT.war
> > [INFO ]: com.qpass.payment.multinodeCloud.DeployTest:
> >          Test: deployExtractsWar Result={0}:
> > {ampait-back-1.opsdevna3.amdocsdc.net:8999=Successfull Deployment of
> > WAR
> > file: extractsApp} [INFO ]: com.qpass.payment.multinodeCloud.DeployTest:
> >          Test:deployExtractsWar: Time Spent 1 min 23 secs 14 ms myWar
> > from getWarUrl = nxtcomSampleApp-amp_i-SNAPSHOT.war
> > [INFO ]: com.qpass.payment.multinodeCloud.DeployTest:
> >          Test: deployNxtSampleWar Result={0}:
> > {ampait-back-1.opsdevna3.amdocsdc.net:8999=Successfull Deployment of
> > WAR
> > file: nxtcomServices} [INFO ]:
> com.qpass.payment.multinodeCloud.DeployTest:
> >          Test:deployNxtSampleWar: Time Spent 47 secs 410 ms myWar from
> > getWarUrl = zmobileSampleApp-amp_i-SNAPSHOT.war
> > [INFO ]: com.qpass.payment.multinodeCloud.DeployTest:
> >          Test: deployZmobileSampleWar Result={0}:
> > {ampait-back-1.opsdevna3.amdocsdc.net:8999=Successfull Deployment of
> > WAR
> > file: zmobileServices} [INFO ]:
> com.qpass.payment.multinodeCloud.DeployTest:
> >          Test:deployZmobileSampleWar: Time Spent 31 secs 400 ms myWar
> > from getWarUrl = mobilePaymentsWebServiceApp-amp_i-SNAPSHOT.war
> > [INFO ]: com.qpass.payment.multinodeCloud.DeployTest:
> >          Test: deployWebServiceApp Result={0}:
> > {ampait-front-1.opsdevna3.amdocsdc.net:8999=Successfull Deployment of
> > WAR
> > file: ROOT} [INFO ]: com.qpass.payment.multinodeCloud.DeployTest:
> >          Test:deployBackWarToSelectedEnv: Time Spent 1 min 33 secs 791
> > ms myWar from getWarUrl =
> > paymentsReportingUiApplication-amp_i-SNAPSHOT.war
> >
> > This message and the information contained herein is proprietary and
> > confidential and subject to the Amdocs policy statement, you may
> > review at http://www.amdocs.com/email_disclaimer.asp
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> > For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> > For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
> >
> >
>
> This message and the information contained herein is proprietary and
> confidential and subject to the Amdocs policy statement, you may review at
> http://www.amdocs.com/email_disclaimer.asp
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>
>


--
http://about.me/lairdnelson
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

RE: surefire plugin output changes

John Dix
Thanks laird... I got 2.4.3. Do you know where I can find the release notes for the various versions to see the list of changes made between then and now?

-----Original Message-----
From: Laird Nelson [mailto:[hidden email]]
Sent: Tuesday, January 28, 2014 10:27 AM
To: Maven Users List
Subject: Re: surefire plugin output changes

No, that's the latest version of maven-surefire-plugin.

Run mvn help:effective-pom from a pom.xml in your project and look for the stanza that concerns the maven-surefire-plugin and that will tell you for sure.

Best,
Laird


On Tue, Jan 28, 2014 at 10:06 AM, John Dix <[hidden email]> wrote:

> I got it... 2.16
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: John Dix
> Sent: Tuesday, January 28, 2014 9:45 AM
> To: Maven Users List
> Subject: RE: surefire plugin output changes
>
> Do you know which version Maven 2.1.0 had?
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Stephen Connolly [mailto:[hidden email]]
> Sent: Tuesday, January 28, 2014 12:56 AM
> To: Maven Users List
> Subject: Re: surefire plugin output changes
>
> 3.0.3 defaulted to surefire 2.7.2 if you did not specify a version
>
> 3.0.4 and 3.0.5 default to surefire 2.10
>
> 3.1.1 defaults surefire to 2.12.4
>
> HTH
>
>
> On 28 January 2014 00:52, John Dix <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> > I should point out that I have run 3.0.3 against the build in
> > question and I still received the same non-verbose output they are
> > complaining about. At a loss at what to tell them other than a
> > shoulder shrug and "idunno" I thought I would ask here to see if
> > there was a change somewhere that could account for this.
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: John Dix
> > Sent: Monday, January 27, 2014 4:35 PM
> > To: Maven Users List
> > Subject: surefire plugin output changes
> >
> > Hello all,
> >
> > We have migrated our maven from version 3.0.3 to 3.0.5 and our
> > developers are claiming now that they're not seeing the verbosity in
> > the test outputs like they did before.
> >
> > The only see a synopsis and summary of the number of tests run,
> > failed, and which ones failed. Servers are run in a CentOS 5.3 linux
> > environment within Jenkins.
> >
> > I am being told that before this upgrade they had an extremely
> > chatty output like below. What they haven't been able to confirm for
> > me is whether this change happened after we moved from 2.1.0 to
> > 3.0.3 or not as that was before my time.
> >
> > Can anyone please confirm if this output was/is handled by surefire
> > and maybe a commandline switch in maven got lost, or from somewhere
> > else? The output as from an old archived log the developer gave me.
> >
> >
> > [INFO ]: com.qpass.payment.multinodeCloud.DeployTest:
> >          Connected to Mission Control Server on ::  myWar from
> > getWarUrl = mobilePaymentsApp-amp_i-SNAPSHOT.war
> > objname = ampait/
> > ampait-control-1.opsdevna3.amdocsdc.net/5666/com.qpass:Type=Environm
> > en t [INFO ]: com.qpass.payment.multinodeCloud.DeployTest:
> >          Test: deployAppWartoSelectedsEnv Result={0}:
> > {<machine-name>=Successfull Deployment of WAR file: app} [INFO ]:
> > com.qpass.payment.multinodeCloud.DeployTest:
> >          Test:deployAppWar: Time Spent 2 min 24 secs 324 ms myWar
> > from getWarUrl = mobilePaymentExtractsApp-amp_i-SNAPSHOT.war
> > [INFO ]: com.qpass.payment.multinodeCloud.DeployTest:
> >          Test: deployExtractsWar Result={0}:
> > {ampait-back-1.opsdevna3.amdocsdc.net:8999=Successfull Deployment of
> > WAR
> > file: extractsApp} [INFO ]: com.qpass.payment.multinodeCloud.DeployTest:
> >          Test:deployExtractsWar: Time Spent 1 min 23 secs 14 ms
> > myWar from getWarUrl = nxtcomSampleApp-amp_i-SNAPSHOT.war
> > [INFO ]: com.qpass.payment.multinodeCloud.DeployTest:
> >          Test: deployNxtSampleWar Result={0}:
> > {ampait-back-1.opsdevna3.amdocsdc.net:8999=Successfull Deployment of
> > WAR
> > file: nxtcomServices} [INFO ]:
> com.qpass.payment.multinodeCloud.DeployTest:
> >          Test:deployNxtSampleWar: Time Spent 47 secs 410 ms myWar
> > from getWarUrl = zmobileSampleApp-amp_i-SNAPSHOT.war
> > [INFO ]: com.qpass.payment.multinodeCloud.DeployTest:
> >          Test: deployZmobileSampleWar Result={0}:
> > {ampait-back-1.opsdevna3.amdocsdc.net:8999=Successfull Deployment of
> > WAR
> > file: zmobileServices} [INFO ]:
> com.qpass.payment.multinodeCloud.DeployTest:
> >          Test:deployZmobileSampleWar: Time Spent 31 secs 400 ms
> > myWar from getWarUrl =
> > mobilePaymentsWebServiceApp-amp_i-SNAPSHOT.war
> > [INFO ]: com.qpass.payment.multinodeCloud.DeployTest:
> >          Test: deployWebServiceApp Result={0}:
> > {ampait-front-1.opsdevna3.amdocsdc.net:8999=Successfull Deployment
> > of WAR
> > file: ROOT} [INFO ]: com.qpass.payment.multinodeCloud.DeployTest:
> >          Test:deployBackWarToSelectedEnv: Time Spent 1 min 33 secs
> > 791 ms myWar from getWarUrl =
> > paymentsReportingUiApplication-amp_i-SNAPSHOT.war
> >
> > This message and the information contained herein is proprietary and
> > confidential and subject to the Amdocs policy statement, you may
> > review at http://www.amdocs.com/email_disclaimer.asp
> >
> > --------------------------------------------------------------------
> > - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> > For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
> >
> >
> > --------------------------------------------------------------------
> > - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> > For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
> >
> >
>
> This message and the information contained herein is proprietary and
> confidential and subject to the Amdocs policy statement, you may
> review at http://www.amdocs.com/email_disclaimer.asp
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>
>


--
http://about.me/lairdnelson

This message and the information contained herein is proprietary and confidential and subject to the Amdocs policy statement,
you may review at http://www.amdocs.com/email_disclaimer.asp

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: surefire plugin output changes

ljnelson
On Tue, Jan 28, 2014 at 11:12 AM, John Dix <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Thanks laird... I got 2.4.3. Do you know where I can find the release
> notes for the various versions to see the list of changes made between then
> and now?
>

This is the closest thing I found:
http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/SUREFIRE#selectedTab=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.project%3Achangelog-panel

Have fun digging manually.

Best,
Laird

--
http://about.me/lairdnelson
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Deployment to Tomcat (provided jars)

Scott Klein
In reply to this post by ljnelson
I was hoping that someone could either show me best practice or just comment on the correctness of my approach.

We have multiple projects which run on our app server (tomcat). Therefore, we want our projects to share as much as possible when it comes to provided artifacts in order to reduce our war file size - so everyone relies on the same version of guava for example, which is defined in the dependency management section of our common-parent pom.

We have configured our app servers to include a 2nd lib folder (call it "common-lib") - this is where we want to put all of our projects provided artifacts (after wiping the files in the folder out - hence the separate "common-lib" folder). Tomcat is setup to include this in its classpath.

For example, our nightly build trigger would rm -f all jar files in the common-lib folder, then Project1 would build and push all of its provided jars up to common-lib, followed by Project2, and on, and on. At the end of the build you have a completely refreshed "common-lib" folder with all of the provided jars for each project. (Obviously, if this were the "live" common-lib this might be an issue so we have a "staging" area we actually deploy to - then in our tomcat startup script we replace the "live" common-lib files with those from the "staging" area)

Obviously, if we do not keep a tight rein on dependency versions in project poms this could turn into a nightmare -- but let's assume we can do that.

So here is the approach I am taking:
1. I use the maven-dependency-plugin to copy provided jars into "${project.build.directory}\provided" - I have tied this to <phase>package</phase>

2. I use the maven-antrun-plugin to scp all files in the "${project.build.directory}\provided" folder up to our "common-lib" folder on our app server - I have tied this to <phase>deploy<phase>


I am afraid that maybe our horrible past practices have blinded me from seeing the Maven best practice, so I am looking for a reality check. To me, this seems like something that people would need to do all the time - but I can't seem to find anything that specifically relates to this approach.


Side Note: As I was writing this I kept thinking "why not just deploy our wars with everything that they need, that would be much cleaner and more reproducible. We shouldn't care about artifact (war) file size if this happens in the middle of the night". Here is what I came up with -- we have one jar file that we build which has all of our hibernate code in it, it also generates all of our shared connections for all of our contexts (these are shared session factories). This single artifact *must* be shared - we simply cannot allow each war file to include its own copy - due to singleton style bootstrap of connections.

Is it best practice for a war to deploy with all of its dependencies?


Thanks, in advance
scott








__________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature database 9348 (20140128) __________

The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.

http://www.eset.com


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Deployment to Tomcat (provided jars)

Mark Eggers
On 1/28/2014 11:34 AM, Scott Klein wrote:

> I was hoping that someone could either show me best practice or just
> comment on the correctness of my approach.
>
> We have multiple projects which run on our app server (tomcat).
> Therefore, we want our projects to share as much as possible when it
> comes to provided artifacts in order to reduce our war file size - so
> everyone relies on the same version of guava for example, which is
> defined in the dependency management section of our common-parent
> pom.
>
> We have configured our app servers to include a 2nd lib folder (call
> it "common-lib") - this is where we want to put all of our projects
> provided artifacts (after wiping the files in the folder out - hence
> the separate "common-lib" folder). Tomcat is setup to include this in
> its classpath.
>
> For example, our nightly build trigger would rm -f all jar files in
> the common-lib folder, then Project1 would build and push all of its
> provided jars up to common-lib, followed by Project2, and on, and on.
> At the end of the build you have a completely refreshed "common-lib"
> folder with all of the provided jars for each project. (Obviously, if
> this were the "live" common-lib this might be an issue so we have a
> "staging" area we actually deploy to - then in our tomcat startup
> script we replace the "live" common-lib files with those from the
> "staging" area)
>
> Obviously, if we do not keep a tight rein on dependency versions in
> project poms this could turn into a nightmare -- but let's assume we
> can do that.
>
> So here is the approach I am taking: 1. I use the
> maven-dependency-plugin to copy provided jars into
> "${project.build.directory}\provided" - I have tied this to
> <phase>package</phase>
>
> 2. I use the maven-antrun-plugin to scp all files in the
> "${project.build.directory}\provided" folder up to our "common-lib"
> folder on our app server - I have tied this to <phase>deploy<phase>
>
>
> I am afraid that maybe our horrible past practices have blinded me
> from seeing the Maven best practice, so I am looking for a reality
> check. To me, this seems like something that people would need to do
> all the time - but I can't seem to find anything that specifically
> relates to this approach.
>
>
> Side Note: As I was writing this I kept thinking "why not just deploy
> our wars with everything that they need, that would be much cleaner
> and more reproducible. We shouldn't care about artifact (war) file
> size if this happens in the middle of the night".

Yes, this is the way to go for a variety of reasons (most of which are
better discussed on the Tomcat mailing list). Run Tomcat 7 (currently
7.0.50), use parallel deployment, the Tomcat Maven plugin, and
deployments should be seamless.

> Here is what I came
> up with -- we have one jar file that we build which has all of our
> hibernate code in it, it also generates all of our shared connections
> for all of our contexts (these are shared session factories).

I (think I) know how Hibernate works . . . So you have one JAR that
contains the information for all of your connections? Each context then
gets all of the connections?

I'm not sure I would agree with that practice. So your hibernate.cfg.xml
has configurations for all of your connections? What happens if a
particular web application doesn't need one or more of the connections?

> This single artifact *must* be shared - we simply cannot allow each war
> file to include its own copy - due to singleton style bootstrap of
> connections.

Singletons are isolated per web application. Again, this is more of a
Tomcat question than a Maven one.

>
> Is it best practice for a war to deploy with all of its
> dependencies?
>
>
> Thanks, in advance scott

I'm new to Maven, so take the following with a grain (or two) of salt.
I'm working on creating a rational build environment by doing the following:

1. Examine applications
2. Break up applications into reusable components (WAR, JAR, etc.)
    a. components should be as independent as possible
    b. reference coupled components as a POM dependency
    c. application-specific components belong solely in that application
3. If many projects have the same structure, make an archetype
4. Manage plugins in a parent POM

This all gets shunted off to an internal Nexus for artifact management,
and an internal Jenkins for continuous build, test, and deployment.

I'm not there yet, but we've already seen gains in reproducible builds,
ease of creating new projects, and earlier detection of issues.

. . . just my two cents.
/mde/

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Deployment to Tomcat (provided jars)

Ron Wheeler
In reply to this post by Scott Klein
http://blog.artifact-software.com/tech/?tag=maven
This will get you to a series of articles on how we addressed some of
the issues that you are raising.

Tomcat 7  has made some changes to make this easier but I have not tried
to document how we are using this yet.




Ron

On 28/01/2014 2:34 PM, Scott Klein wrote:

> I was hoping that someone could either show me best practice or just comment on the correctness of my approach.
>
> We have multiple projects which run on our app server (tomcat). Therefore, we want our projects to share as much as possible when it comes to provided artifacts in order to reduce our war file size - so everyone relies on the same version of guava for example, which is defined in the dependency management section of our common-parent pom.
>
> We have configured our app servers to include a 2nd lib folder (call it "common-lib") - this is where we want to put all of our projects provided artifacts (after wiping the files in the folder out - hence the separate "common-lib" folder). Tomcat is setup to include this in its classpath.
>
> For example, our nightly build trigger would rm -f all jar files in the common-lib folder, then Project1 would build and push all of its provided jars up to common-lib, followed by Project2, and on, and on. At the end of the build you have a completely refreshed "common-lib" folder with all of the provided jars for each project. (Obviously, if this were the "live" common-lib this might be an issue so we have a "staging" area we actually deploy to - then in our tomcat startup script we replace the "live" common-lib files with those from the "staging" area)
>
> Obviously, if we do not keep a tight rein on dependency versions in project poms this could turn into a nightmare -- but let's assume we can do that.
>
> So here is the approach I am taking:
> 1. I use the maven-dependency-plugin to copy provided jars into "${project.build.directory}\provided" - I have tied this to <phase>package</phase>
>
> 2. I use the maven-antrun-plugin to scp all files in the "${project.build.directory}\provided" folder up to our "common-lib" folder on our app server - I have tied this to <phase>deploy<phase>
>
>
> I am afraid that maybe our horrible past practices have blinded me from seeing the Maven best practice, so I am looking for a reality check. To me, this seems like something that people would need to do all the time - but I can't seem to find anything that specifically relates to this approach.
>
>
> Side Note: As I was writing this I kept thinking "why not just deploy our wars with everything that they need, that would be much cleaner and more reproducible. We shouldn't care about artifact (war) file size if this happens in the middle of the night". Here is what I came up with -- we have one jar file that we build which has all of our hibernate code in it, it also generates all of our shared connections for all of our contexts (these are shared session factories). This single artifact *must* be shared - we simply cannot allow each war file to include its own copy - due to singleton style bootstrap of connections.
>
> Is it best practice for a war to deploy with all of its dependencies?
>
>
> Thanks, in advance
> scott
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature database 9348 (20140128) __________
>
> The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
>
> http://www.eset.com
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]


--
Ron Wheeler
President
Artifact Software Inc
email: [hidden email]
skype: ronaldmwheeler
phone: 866-970-2435, ext 102


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]