local tests are failing

[Jacopo Cappellato-4]

I see 12 failures when I run tests on trunk locally; however I have some local changes that *shouldn't* cause these failures.
Am I the only one? I will check my code regardless but in the meantime it would help if any of you could comment if you see issues.

Thanks
Jacopo

[Adrian Crum-3]

I ran tests before committing rev 1339079 and they all passed.

-Adrian

On 5/16/2012 10:43 AM, Jacopo Cappellato wrote:
> I see 12 failures when I run tests on trunk locally; however I have some local changes that *shouldn't* cause these failures.
> Am I the only one? I will check my code regardless but in the meantime it would help if any of you could comment if you see issues.
>
> Thanks
> Jacopo

[Jacques Le Roux]

Trying "ant clean-all load-demo run-tests" here with a clean instance (trunk HEAD)

Jacques

From: "Jacopo Cappellato" <[hidden email]>
>I see 12 failures when I run tests on trunk locally; however I have some local changes that *shouldn't* cause these failures.
> Am I the only one? I will check my code regardless but in the meantime it would help if any of you could comment if you see
> issues.
>
> Thanks
> Jacopo

[Jacques Le Roux]

You mean r1339089, right?

Jacques

From: "Adrian Crum" <[hidden email]>

>I ran tests before committing rev 1339079 and they all passed.
>
> -Adrian
>
> On 5/16/2012 10:43 AM, Jacopo Cappellato wrote:
>> I see 12 failures when I run tests on trunk locally; however I have some local changes that *shouldn't* cause these failures.
>> Am I the only one? I will check my code regardless but in the meantime it would help if any of you could comment if you see
>> issues.
>>
>> Thanks
>> Jacopo

[Jacques Le Roux]

Ha sorry no, there is also r1339079, OK running test here anyway...

Jacques

From: "Jacques Le Roux" <[hidden email]>

> You mean r1339089, right?
>
> Jacques
>
> From: "Adrian Crum" <[hidden email]>
>>I ran tests before committing rev 1339079 and they all passed.
>>
>> -Adrian
>>
>> On 5/16/2012 10:43 AM, Jacopo Cappellato wrote:
>>> I see 12 failures when I run tests on trunk locally; however I have some local changes that *shouldn't* cause these failures.
>>> Am I the only one? I will check my code regardless but in the meantime it would help if any of you could comment if you see
>>> issues.
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>> Jacopo
>

[Jacopo Cappellato-4]

Ok, it happened to be a local change, sorry for the confusion.

Jacopo

On May 16, 2012, at 12:10 PM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:

> Ha sorry no, there is also r1339079, OK running test here anyway...
>
> Jacques
>
> From: "Jacques Le Roux" <[hidden email]>
>> You mean r1339089, right?
>> Jacques
>> From: "Adrian Crum" <[hidden email]>
>>> I ran tests before committing rev 1339079 and they all passed.
>>>
>>> -Adrian
>>>
>>> On 5/16/2012 10:43 AM, Jacopo Cappellato wrote:
>>>> I see 12 failures when I run tests on trunk locally; however I have some local changes that *shouldn't* cause these failures.
>>>> Am I the only one? I will check my code regardless but in the meantime it would help if any of you could comment if you see issues.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks
>>>> Jacopo
>>

[Jacques Le Roux]

Success here also at r1339088

Jacques

From: "Jacques Le Roux" <[hidden email]>

> Ha sorry no, there is also r1339079, OK running test here anyway...
>
> Jacques
>
> From: "Jacques Le Roux" <[hidden email]>
>> You mean r1339089, right?
>>
>> Jacques
>>
>> From: "Adrian Crum" <[hidden email]>
>>>I ran tests before committing rev 1339079 and they all passed.
>>>
>>> -Adrian
>>>
>>> On 5/16/2012 10:43 AM, Jacopo Cappellato wrote:
>>>> I see 12 failures when I run tests on trunk locally; however I have some local changes that *shouldn't* cause these failures.
>>>> Am I the only one? I will check my code regardless but in the meantime it would help if any of you could comment if you see
>>>> issues.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks
>>>> Jacopo
>>