[
Date Prev][
Date Next][
Thread Prev][
Thread Next][
Date Index][
Thread Index]
[
List Home]
Re: [jakartaee-platform-dev] Fair rules for "optional" TCK compliance tests
|
I thought that's what "at least" gave us. I'm up for improving
the language if the consensus conclusion is that this says there
must be at least one "super" implementation.
I will second the point BJ made earlier -- the more optional
elements there are, the less a customer can count on the
specification to provide certainty about the product.
Regardless, I don't know that this is something that needs to
derail Jakarta EE 9. Am I missing something?
-- Ed
On 7/2/2020 3:15 PM, Kevin Sutter
wrote:
The EFSP
states this
for Compatible Implemention:
A Compatible Implementation must
fully
implement all non-optional elements of a Specification Version,
must
not extend the API (no supersetting), and must fulfill all the
requirements
of the corresponding TCK. A Specification Version must identify
at least
one Compatible Implementation under an Open Source License that
implements
all optional elements of the Specification and fulfills the
requirements
of all elements (including optional elements) of the TCK.
So, depending on the interpretation of the second sentence, the
optional
elements could be satisfied by one or more Compatible Impls.
Regardless,
it states that a Specification Version (ie. Jakarta EE 9) has to
provide
one or more CIs that demonstrate all Required and Optional
aspects of the
spec.
---------------------------------------------------
Kevin Sutter
STSM, MicroProfile and Jakarta EE architect @ IBM
e-mail: sutter@xxxxxxxxxx Twitter: @kwsutter
phone: tl-553-3620 (office), 507-253-3620 (office)
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/kevinwsutter
From:
David
Blevins <dblevins@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To:
jakartaee-platform
developer discussions <jakartaee-platform-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date:
07/02/2020
16:55
Subject:
[EXTERNAL]
Re: [jakartaee-platform-dev] Fair rules for "optional" TCK
compliance
tests
Sent
by: jakartaee-platform-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
> On Jul 2, 2020, at 8:48 AM,
Ed Bratt <ed.bratt@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> First, what I think the rules and specifications say:
>
> 1. If a feature is included in Jakarta EE, it must have a
TCK.
>
> 2. If a feature in the platform is specified as Optional,
the platform
that certifies compatibility of that feature must include all
other Required
features. (This is also true for component specifications,
just replace
component-name for platform.)
>
> 3. If there are multiple independent optional features,
nothing says
one single implementation must deliver all the separate
optional features.
There must be one of each, but I believe they can be separate
compatible
implementations.
So it sounds like to your interoperation the scenario I
describe of Joe's
and Jane's pizza implementations would allow the final
spec/TCK to be shipped.
Is there anyone who would disagree with this?
If not, we should codify this understanding at the
specification committee
level so it isn't open to interpretation.
-David
_______________________________________________
jakartaee-platform-dev mailing list
jakartaee-platform-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe from this list, visit https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/jakartaee-platform-dev
_______________________________________________
jakartaee-platform-dev mailing list
jakartaee-platform-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe from this list, visit https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/jakartaee-platform-dev