Adam Lally wrote: > On 7/31/07, Marshall Schor <msa@...> wrote: > >> Also - the resources need to be included in the jars (they have the >> message bundles, etc.). >> >> > > The resource are already in the jars, so we don't need to add them in > this step. Just the source files need to be added. > oops - I didn't look closely at the -u flag. I thought you were re-building & replacing the jars. -Marshall
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/UIMA-520?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ]
Marshall Schor closed UIMA-520.
-------------------------------
Resolution: Fixed
Fix Version/s: 2.2
> Calling CasCreationUtils to produce a custom resource is ignoring the passed in ResourceManager in some cases
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: UIMA-520
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/UIMA-520
> Project: UIMA
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: Core Java Framework
> Affects Versions: 2.1
> Reporter: Marshall Schor
> Assignee: Marshall Schor
> Priority: Minor
> Fix For: 2.2
>
>
> A specific case: CasCreationUtils.getMetaDataList(Collection, ResourceManager, Map) for a
ResourceSpecifier calls
> UIMAFramewor.produceResource but passes in Collections.EMPTY_MAP instead of creating one with the ResourceManager.
> This results in resources defined in class paths specified only via the ResourceManager not being found.
(Continue reading)
Marshall Schor wrote: > Running org.apache.uima.cas.test.AnnotationTreeTest > > > testTree(org.apache.uima.cas.test.AnnotationTreeTest) Time elapsed: > 0.16 sec <<< FAILURE! > junit.framework.AssertionFailedError > at > junit.framework.AssertionFailedError.<init>(AssertionFailedError.java:11) > at junit.framework.Assert.fail(Assert.java:47) > at junit.framework.Assert.assertTrue(Assert.java:20) > at junit.framework.Assert.assertTrue(Assert.java:27) > at > org.apache.uima.cas.test.AnnotationTreeTest.testTree(AnnotationTreeTest.java:85) > > > Does anyone else have this failure? -Marshall I see it too, but only when running all tests with mvn install. Running the test individually works fine. I'll investigate. --Thilo
It's our old friend the type priorities again. Even though the test case does not use type priorities, types are sorted differently in the type system depending on JVM version. So the test case went through with JDK 1.6_1, but not 1.5_7, for example. This sucks. Since I don't have time to go after the root cause of this, I have modified the test case to remove this dependency. --Thilo Thilo Goetz wrote: > Marshall Schor wrote: >> Running org.apache.uima.cas.test.AnnotationTreeTest >> >> >> testTree(org.apache.uima.cas.test.AnnotationTreeTest) Time elapsed: >> 0.16 sec <<< FAILURE! >> junit.framework.AssertionFailedError >> at >> junit.framework.AssertionFailedError.<init>(AssertionFailedError.java:11) >> at junit.framework.Assert.fail(Assert.java:47) >> at junit.framework.Assert.assertTrue(Assert.java:20) >> at junit.framework.Assert.assertTrue(Assert.java:27) >> at >> org.apache.uima.cas.test.AnnotationTreeTest.testTree(AnnotationTreeTest.java:85) >> >> >> Does anyone else have this failure? -Marshall > > I see it too, but only when running all tests with mvn install. Running > the test individually works fine. I'll investigate.(Continue reading)
Thilo Goetz wrote: > It's our old friend the type priorities again. Even though the test > case does not use type priorities, types are sorted differently in > the type system depending on JVM version. So the test case went > through with JDK 1.6_1, but not 1.5_7, for example. This sucks. > Since I don't have time to go after the root cause of this, I have > modified the test case to remove this dependency. > As I recall, the type order changes when there is no ordering specified, because it depends on the order returned from "hashing"; and the hash function changed from jdk to jdk. -Marshall > --Thilo > > Thilo Goetz wrote: > >> Marshall Schor wrote: >> >>> Running org.apache.uima.cas.test.AnnotationTreeTest >>> >>> >>> testTree(org.apache.uima.cas.test.AnnotationTreeTest) Time elapsed: >>> 0.16 sec <<< FAILURE! >>> junit.framework.AssertionFailedError >>> at >>> junit.framework.AssertionFailedError.<init>(AssertionFailedError.java:11) >>> at junit.framework.Assert.fail(Assert.java:47) >>> at junit.framework.Assert.assertTrue(Assert.java:20)(Continue reading)
Marshall Schor wrote: > Thilo Goetz wrote: >> It's our old friend the type priorities again. Even though the test >> case does not use type priorities, types are sorted differently in >> the type system depending on JVM version. So the test case went >> through with JDK 1.6_1, but not 1.5_7, for example. This sucks. >> Since I don't have time to go after the root cause of this, I have >> modified the test case to remove this dependency. >> > As I recall, the type order changes when there is no ordering specified, > because it depends on > the order returned from "hashing"; and the hash function changed from > jdk to jdk. Yes, I seem to remember something along those lines. It would be worth investigating if we could change the implementation not to depend on the order objects come out of a hash map. Not now, though. --Thilo
Marshall Schor wrote: > Adam Lally wrote: >> On 7/31/07, Marshall Schor <msa@...> wrote: >> >>> Also - the resources need to be included in the jars (they have the >>> message bundles, etc.). >>> >>> >> >> The resource are already in the jars, so we don't need to add them in >> this step. Just the source files need to be added. >> > oops - I didn't look closely at the -u flag. I thought you were > re-building & replacing the jars. > > -Marshall > > > I did some tests on linux and after adding #!/bin/sh to the first line, all seems to be fine. -- Michael
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/UIMA-499?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ]
Michael Baessler updated UIMA-499:
----------------------------------
Fix Version/s: 2.2
> Make it easier for users to view UIMA JavaDocs from Eclipse
> -----------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: UIMA-499
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/UIMA-499
> Project: UIMA
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: Build, Packaging and Test
> Reporter: Thilo Goetz
> Assignee: Adam Lally
> Priority: Minor
> Fix For: 2.2
>
>
> Adding source jars to our distribution will make programming against our APIs a lot more convenient.
--
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
(Continue reading)
Michael Baessler wrote: > Marshall Schor wrote: >> Adam Lally wrote: >>> On 7/31/07, Marshall Schor <msa@...> wrote: >>> >>>> Also - the resources need to be included in the jars (they have the >>>> message bundles, etc.). >>>> >>>> >>> >>> The resource are already in the jars, so we don't need to add them in >>> this step. Just the source files need to be added. >>> >> oops - I didn't look closely at the -u flag. I thought you were >> re-building & replacing the jars. >> >> -Marshall >> >> >> > I did some tests on linux and after adding > #!/bin/sh > to the first line, all seems to be fine. > > -- Michael > > I see that issue 499 is still in reopen state. I checked in my changes using this issue. So I think we can close them or is there anything else we need to do?(Continue reading)
RSS Feed35 | |
|---|---|
179 | |
105 | |
281 | |
302 | |
166 | |
425 | |
287 | |
152 | |
92 | |
420 | |
283 | |
276 | |
255 | |
181 | |
190 | |
195 | |
262 | |
95 | |
132 | |
178 | |
138 | |
127 | |
72 | |
104 | |
132 | |
150 | |
261 | |
371 | |
605 | |
628 | |
396 | |
203 | |
114 | |
107 | |
92 | |
88 | |
125 | |
125 | |
125 | |
126 | |
160 | |
304 | |
285 | |
300 | |
187 | |
450 | |
603 | |
558 | |
339 | |
192 | |
417 | |
173 | |
182 | |
347 | |
412 | |
332 | |
238 | |
137 |
