+1 on moving EJB-specific requirements to EJB TCK and mark them required. I think in the part of TCK refactoring and rehoming, we should move some TCKs to a logical place.
Thanks
Emily
I'm mentioning something I don't really have the time to work on myself at this time, but it still should be brought up.
There are EJB-specific spec requirements in the CDI spec. There are a few hundred tests in the CDI TCK that are for EJB specifically and enforce these requirements. From a CDI perspective all these requirements and tests are optional.
CDI became a permanent dependency of EJB in EJB 3.1. It is somewhat indirect, but that's how the math works out; you can't have an EJB implementation that does not support CDI including CDI decorators. Therefore, from an EJB perspective all these "optional" tests are actually required. No one should be allowed to claim Jakarta EE Web Profile or Platform compliance without passing these EJB+CDI integration tests.
At the moment it's difficult to tell who if anyone is running these tests. I count 2,767 uses of org.testng.annotations.Test in the CDI TCK, yet I see most our certification requests for Web Profile and Platform show 1796 CDI tests run. It seems we've all overlooked them -- in fairness they are marked optional.
What do people think about moving these EJB-specific requirements and tests into the EJB spec and TCK and marking them required?
--
David Blevins
http://twitter.com/dblevins
http://www.tomitribe.com
_______________________________________________
cdi-dev mailing list
cdi-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe from this list, visit https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cdi-dev
--
