Skip to content

Conversation

@michael-o
Copy link
Member

…oy plugin"

This reverts commit 83b2d51.

Following this checklist to help us incorporate your
contribution quickly and easily:

  • Make sure there is a JIRA issue filed
    for the change (usually before you start working on it). Trivial changes like typos do not
    require a JIRA issue. Your pull request should address just this issue, without
    pulling in other changes.
  • Each commit in the pull request should have a meaningful subject line and body.
  • Format the pull request title like [MPH-XXX] - Fixes bug in ApproximateQuantiles,
    where you replace MPH-XXX with the appropriate JIRA issue. Best practice
    is to use the JIRA issue title in the pull request title and in the first line of the
    commit message.
  • Write a pull request description that is detailed enough to understand what the pull request does, how, and why.
  • Run mvn clean verify to make sure basic checks pass. A more thorough check will
    be performed on your pull request automatically.
  • You have run the integration tests successfully (mvn -Prun-its clean verify).

If your pull request is about ~20 lines of code you don't need to sign an
Individual Contributor License Agreement if you are unsure
please ask on the developers list.

To make clear that you license your contribution under
the Apache License Version 2.0, January 2004
you have to acknowledge this by using the following check-box.

This reverts commit 83b2d51 and closes #16.
@rfscholte
Copy link
Contributor

I think the description is wrong, because MDEPLOY-231 is still valid to me. It looks like you're only restoring an IT, which is not the same.

@michael-o
Copy link
Member Author

I am confused by your statement. I do not restore the IT, I am removing it. Please explain how you understand the issue is still valid.

@michael-o
Copy link
Member Author

Your understanding is that the commit title should read: "Revert IT of MDEPLOY-231"?

@rfscholte
Copy link
Contributor

I was a bit confused, but it is not a complete revert, just partial.
However, I think it is valid to keep this IT. It in an integration test that ensures the checksums are generated. If Artifact Resolver is being refactored or this plugin switches to a different implementation, it is good to verify the checksums will still be there.

@michael-o
Copy link
Member Author

michael-o commented Dec 25, 2020

The problem with this is that it is not portable. It does not know which checksums are generated. It is assumed, but nothing else. This especially depends on the Resolver version used...

@michael-o
Copy link
Member Author

@rfscholte
Copy link
Contributor

But based on the Maven version we know the default generated checksum right?

@michael-o
Copy link
Member Author

But based on the Maven version we know the default generated checksum right?

Theoretically, yes. You could add this to the configuration somehow.

@slawekjaranowski
Copy link
Member

I would to refresh this PR ...

Simply m-deploy-p is not responsible for checksum generation, so should not be tested here ...

@michael-o
Copy link
Member Author

I would to refresh this PR ...

Simply m-deploy-p is not responsible for checksum generation, so should not be tested here ...

This is also my stance. Please go on.

@slawekjaranowski
Copy link
Member

Will be done in another PR 😄

@michael-o
Copy link
Member Author

michael-o commented Jan 22, 2023

Please delete this branch when your PR is done.

@slawekjaranowski slawekjaranowski deleted the MDEPLOY-282 branch January 26, 2023 20:43
@jira-importer
Copy link

Resolve #494

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants