| Re: [cu-dev] Collecting and tracking Concurrency 3.0 TCK scenarios and a question on EJB |
I opened the following issue to collect and track TCK tests that need to be added for Concurrency 3.0, starting it out with some obvious ones based on items that have already gone in:
https://github.com/eclipse-ee4j/concurrency-api/issues/154
If anyone has a better way of doing this, please go ahead. I decided to open it because I'm wondering if all the necessary TCK work will be achievable within the 4Q timeframe for finalizing a 3.0 spec release for Jakarta EE 10.
Currently, the Platform TCK validates Concurrency on EJB, Servlet, JSP. If the new Concurrency SPEC TCK also test on EJB, Servlet, JSP, then the Platform TCK Concurrency tests will not be needed (e.g. could be removed). But if the Concurrency SPEC TCK doesn't test on EJB, Servlet, JSP, then the Platform TCK Concurrency tests will be needed.
The Concurrency SPEC TCK will also need to validate that the
Concurrency SPEC API signatures are correct for the implementation
being tested.
Also, please feel free to edit the list in the issue description to add scenarios or just reply to the issue or this email for those who don't have edit permission, and someone who does can get them added.
I'm also wondering about TCK testing of the resource definitions deployment descriptor entries. Does the Concurrency spec TCK need to cover those or are those done at another level? The schemas that are currently showing for Jakarta EE 10 https://jakarta.ee/xml/ns/jakartaee/#10don't yet reflect the updates that we put in earlier this year.
The more of the Concurrency API that we test, the better but you
could also add more TCK tests for the next Concurrency minor/major
release. Once, Concurrency 3.0 has been released, no more
additional Concurrency 3.0 TCK tests may be added (adding tests
would invalidate any implementations that have passed the final
Concurrency 3.0 TCK).
Also, a question on @Asynchronous and EJBs which came up during an internal review of the specification updates made thus far by the organization that I work under. It was brought up that EJBs that are CDI managed beans ought to be able to use the new @Asynchronous annotation as long as they aren't also annotated with the EJB @Asynchronous annotation. This would make for a more consistent statement on the support for @Asynchronous with CDI managed beans and would allow EJBs to start switching over to the new annotation. It would likely incur some complexity in addressing how our @Asynchronous interacts with other aspects of EJB. Would it be worth trying to change this in the 3.0 release?
IMO, sounds like a good discussion for ejb-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx just
to get more feedback from others.
_______________________________________________ cu-dev mailing list cu-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe from this list, visit https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cu-dev