| [jakartaee-platform-dev] How should Platform SPEC level requirements be covered by new (SPEC API) TCKs? |
Hi,
There really wasn't enough time in the call today to discuss the possibility of having SPEC API level TCKs and how the Platform SPEC requirements would be covered. We have already had some discussion just not on this mailing list yet. I would like to answer how we will identify the Platform SPEC level requirements that SPEC API level TCKs must meet.
More details from past discussions over the past few years:
From April 2019, we have jakartaee-tck/issues/51 `Turning
Platform TCK into a multi-dependency Maven project` [1]2. From a
weeks ago, we have jaxrs-api/issues/924 `TCK: Extend existing TCK or start our own
one` [2] which has a few different options mentioned. The
follow up discussion is on the Platform TCK mailing list [2].
Of note is Bill Shannon's response [3] about which tests should
remain in the Platform TCK (CTS) and which tests should move to
the SPEC API project. This was the first general discussion
thread that we had regarding [1].
More recently, jaxrs-api/issues/924
was opened to answer `TCK:
Extend existing TCK or start our own one?` which has a different
opinions states but one comment was that jaxrs-api team already
started adding SPEC API (tck) tests. Other SPEC API projects
have done the same (e.g. see jsonp tck folder [5]) or are
looking to discuss how they will soon add TCK tests).
Of note are a few Servlet TCK
conversations, [6] started in Sept 2020 on the servlet-dev ml
and continued on the spec-project-leads ml [7] in Oct 2020.
Also Faces [8] has a discussion started as well.
Batch opened Platform TCK issues/574
[9] to improve how the Batch TCK tests are maintained which
references the [10] conversation about using Arquillian in the
Batch TCK.
IMO, regardless of how we decide to
maintain the internals of the various TCKs, it would be good to
identify what exactly the Platform SPEC requirements are now and
in the future that at a minimum are required as requested by
[11].
Scott
[1] https://github.com/eclipse-ee4j/jakartaee-tck/issues/51
[2] https://www.eclipse.org/lists/jakartaee-tck-dev/msg00111.html
[3] https://www.eclipse.org/lists/jakartaee-tck-dev/msg00123.html
[4] https://github.com/eclipse-ee4j/jaxrs-api/issues/924
[5] https://github.com/eclipse-ee4j/jsonp/tree/master/tck
[6] https://www.eclipse.org/lists/servlet-dev/msg00287.html
[7] https://www.eclipse.org/lists/jakartaee-spec-project-leads/msg00671.html
[8] https://www.eclipse.org/lists/faces-dev/msg00054.html
[9] https://github.com/eclipse-ee4j/jakartaee-tck/issues/574
[10] https://ondro.inginea.eu/index.php/possible-ways-to-use-arquillian-in-jakarta-ee-tcks/
[11]
https://github.com/eclipse-ee4j/jaxrs-api/issues/924#issuecomment-743344857