bval-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Donald Woods <dwo...@apache.org>
Subject Re: svn commit: r1002445 - /incubator/bval/trunk/bval-tck/pom.xml
Date Fri, 01 Oct 2010 22:14:08 GMT
Hopefully Kevan will chime in too, but it's my understanding that we
have to pass the BVAL TCK as provided by Oracle under the Oracle/ASF NDA
in order to claim we're certified....

During daily testing, I use the TCK files downloaded from the JBoss
repo.  Before we release the Apache BVAL artifacts, I always run the
release artifacts against the TCK as provided by Oracle.


-Donald


On 10/1/10 2:14 PM, Matt Benson wrote:
> 
> On Oct 1, 2010, at 12:26 PM, Donald Woods wrote:
> 
>> The current BVAL TCK from Oracle that we have to certify with is
>> jsr303-tck-1.0.3.GA-dist.zip, which uses the 1.0.3.GA level of the API.
>>
> 
> Apparently I am not fully cognizant of the TCK-related aspects of the JCP process.  https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/BeanValidation/JSR303+TCK
says:
>   TBD - Need to ask if we must use the Sun/Oracle provided TCK for final certification
testing....
> 
> Have there been further developments in this regard?  It was my impression that a spec
implementation must simply pass the TCK supplied by the spec lead.  I had no idea there was
both an Oracle TCK and a JBoss TCK.  Where I can learn more about certification as it applies
to this JSR and our efforts?
> 
>> If you look at the TCK that gets downloaded during the TCK build, those
>> files also download the 1.0.3.GA level of the API and matches the
>> distribution as provided by Oracle.
>>
> 
> I honestly don't see where you see this.  I don't see any indication of it in bval-tck/target/dependency/lib
or in the tck POM.
> 
>> I haven't looked at the 1.0.4 level yet, so is there something in there
>> that we need?  What changes were introduced?
>>
> 
> My lack of understanding of the issues simply led me to believe that the more recent
release of the spec we could pass, the better.  In particular I had hoped that there might
be a difference in TCK versions with regard to my allegations on the incorrectness of the
RI implementation of the Path interface.
> 
> -Matt
> 
>>
>> -Donald
>>
>>
>> On 10/1/10 12:37 PM, Matt Benson wrote:
>>>
>>> On Oct 1, 2010, at 11:18 AM, Donald Woods wrote:
>>>
>>>> Matt, the latest TCK drop from Oracle is 1.0.3, so I'd rather not move
>>>> up until we have a newer TCK level that matches.....
>>>>
>>>
>>> I'm fine with whatever the community decides, of course, but can you explain
the above?  I'm afraid I don't understand...
>>>
>>> -Matt
>>>
>>>>
>>>> -Donald
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 9/28/10 9:53 PM, mbenson@apache.org wrote:
>>>>> Author: mbenson
>>>>> Date: Wed Sep 29 01:53:36 2010
>>>>> New Revision: 1002445
>>>>>
>>>>> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1002445&view=rev
>>>>> Log:
>>>>> upgrade to tck version 1.0.4.GA
>>>>>
>>>>> Modified:
>>>>>   incubator/bval/trunk/bval-tck/pom.xml
>>>>>
>>>>> Modified: incubator/bval/trunk/bval-tck/pom.xml
>>>>> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/incubator/bval/trunk/bval-tck/pom.xml?rev=1002445&r1=1002444&r2=1002445&view=diff
>>>>> ==============================================================================
>>>>> --- incubator/bval/trunk/bval-tck/pom.xml (original)
>>>>> +++ incubator/bval/trunk/bval-tck/pom.xml Wed Sep 29 01:53:36 2010
>>>>> @@ -92,7 +92,7 @@
>>>>>                <dependency>
>>>>>                    <groupId>org.hibernate.jsr303.tck</groupId>
>>>>>                    <artifactId>jsr303-tck</artifactId>
>>>>> -                    <version>1.0.3.GA</version>
>>>>> +                    <version>1.0.4.GA</version>
>>>>>                </dependency>
>>>>>                <dependency>
>>>>>                    <groupId>org.jboss.test-harness</groupId>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>>>
> 
> 

Mime
View raw message