Join GitHub today
GitHub is home to over 40 million developers working together to host and review code, manage projects, and build software together.
Sign upUse version of tika-parsers without a classifier #345
Conversation
jrwiebe
requested a review
from ruebot
Aug 14, 2019
ruebot
approved these changes
Aug 14, 2019
Tested with tweaking docker-aut:
|
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
codecov
bot
commented
Aug 14, 2019
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #345 +/- ##
======================================
Coverage 75.2% 75.2%
======================================
Files 39 39
Lines 1230 1230
Branches 224 224
======================================
Hits 925 925
Misses 214 214
Partials 91 91 Continue to review full report at Codecov.
|
ruebot
merged commit 39831c2
into
master
Aug 14, 2019
ruebot
deleted the
pom-update
branch
Aug 14, 2019
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
jrwiebe commentedAug 14, 2019
As @ruebot mentioned on Slack, running AUT with
--packages
produced error messages, e.g.:This is because ivy isn't good at finding dependencies specified with a classifier.
Since the classifier wasn't doing any useful work I removed it from our fork of tika and pushed a new release. This PR updates our POM accordingly.
How should this be tested?
Something like this:
There should be no errors.
I tested by running this code: