Skip to content
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

Re-Formatted and re-organized POMs - Part 2 #479

Merged
merged 12 commits into from
Sep 23, 2024

Conversation

hypfvieh
Copy link
Contributor

This is a follow-up to #446.

I merged the latest upstream changes and revisited the POM configuration:

  • Moved more dependencies to dependency management
  • Removed broken shade-plugin config in library (that`s the root cause for broken POMs)
  • Added javadoc and maven-source-plugin to core module, so all submodules will create sources and javadoc jars
  • Javadoc Plugin is disabled by default and will be enabled by release profile (automatically enabled by maven-release-plugin when release:prepare release:perform is called)

I tested this configuration by changing the groupId and Maven Central stuff to my personal groupId etc. For testing I disabled the nexus-staging-maven-plugin and disabled the broken unit tests of #478. I then checked the uploaded artifacts in Maven Central Nexus manually.
All release checks of Nexus are passed now.

  • Javadoc JAR ✔️
  • Source JAR ✔️
  • Test JAR ✔️
  • All JARs signed ✔️

Something more I've noticed:
The unit tests are really old school designed. It relies on jupiter-vintage which is a compatibility layer to allow old Junit 3 and 4 style tests to be used.
These days the tests should really be JUnit 5 native tests using proper annotations, not extending "TestCase" and not using "TestSuite".

JUnit 5 offers a lot of improvements e.g. using @ParametrizedTest, custom test names, running tests concurrently etc.
As testing is a big topic itself, I did not change anything here, but I would highly recommend think about refactoring those tests (to also get rid of forced alphabetically execution).

And one last note:
This PR includes the broken unit tests I reported in #478.
This means, this PR will not solve that issue and will only work when the unit tests are fixed.

@jstaerk
Copy link
Collaborator

jstaerk commented Sep 19, 2024

@hypfvieh are you available tomorrow afternoon e.g. ~15°°? I would try another merge but I may need support if it doesnt work.

@hypfvieh
Copy link
Contributor Author

We can try it. Usually I'm at work till 4 pm, but you can try to contact me by email (address should be in the commit).

@jstaerk
Copy link
Collaborator

jstaerk commented Sep 20, 2024

Hi,
I didnt see the email and I'm no longer sure if this will be released today, tomorrow, sunday or maybe monday but please contact me at jochen at zugferd.org

@jstaerk jstaerk merged commit 8d6ddc7 into ZUGFeRD:master Sep 23, 2024
1 check failed
jstaerk added a commit that referenced this pull request Sep 23, 2024
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.

2 participants