| Short version here is references to "TCK issue tracker" were made in the February/March time-frame with these thoughts in mind:
- Each project will eventually need a TCK repo, there was enough time to create them, and therefore for 80% of the projects would have an intuitive place for the issues to be filed. - It doesn't say "TCK repo" so that a project could document "this is the location of our TCK issue tracker" and that could be any git repo they poses, including their spec or api repo
We still can create those repos, but obviously we are out of time for this release, so that leaves it less than clear for this iteration.
There are a handful of issue workflows a specification project will need to support:
- certification requests - test challenges - specification fixes and new features
We've sort of said, "everyone must use their spec repo issue tracker for all the above", which certainly works for now and is consistent.
I think it might age poorly as at some point there will be TCK repos and people will naturally start using them, rules or not, and we'll be forced to adapt the rule again. Which is completely fine for me. Having a rule and changing it later is often better than no rule and nit-picking small decisions.
-- David Blevins 310-633-3852
I think we should have consistency in where to host the certification issues.
Reading: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Et3LtK-2SUuAoOV56t8R8fKnRWhbWqg9SLgm-VhbDPY/edit#heading=h.c86x9rk7bay9
Requests to be acknowledged as a certified implementation MUST be filed via the specification project’s TCK issue tracker using the label `certification` and include the following information:
I see I'm the only one who interpreted that as an issue against the TCK project. The other examples use spec project issues, not what I assumed was the intent in saying "TCK issue tracker".
So if we agree it's the spec project that should host these issues, I can go (re)create all the required labels for the TCK challenge workflow over in the batch-api (spec) project to support this.
Hopefully the doc can be updated to clarify (and maybe also add the comment: - "The TCK results should be hosted by the Compatible Implementation not by the Specification Project").
---
The wording comes up again related to "Improvement" - Requests for improvement to tests MUST simply be created as issues with a label of `enhancement` in the specification project’s TCK issue tracker.
IMHO, I do think it might not be helpful at this point to try to specify an "enhancement"-related workflow. Enhancements may be added for a variety of overlapping reasons: new features, increased coverage of old features, better automation, maybe even refactoring, and we're going to end up with some diverse approaches I'd think.
------------------------------------------------------
Scott Kurz
WebSphere Batch and Compute Grid
Development and Level 3 Team Lead
http://www.ibm.com/support/techdocs/atsmastr.nsf/WebIndex/WP102544
skurz@xxxxxxxxxx
--------------------------------------------------------
<graycol.gif>David Blevins ---07/30/2019 10:57:12 PM---All, I went through all the Spec PRs and updated them so each has the exact same 9 checkboxes. Some
From: David Blevins <dblevins@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: JakartaEE Spec Project Leadership discussions <jakartaee-spec-project-leads@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: 07/30/2019 10:57 PM
Subject: [EXTERNAL] [jakartaee-spec-project-leads] Consistent checkboxes for jakartaee/specifications PRs & review notes everyone should know
Sent by: jakartaee-spec-project-leads-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
All,
I went through all the Spec PRs and updated them so each has the exact same 9 checkboxes. Some special notes below.
# JAVADOC CHECKBOX
Many of you now have a "PR# 2 JavaDoc" item that may or may not be checked appropriately. Can you please review?
This is important as some specs have not yet created their Javadoc PR, such as the Jakarta EE Platform spec. Everyone else has to get that one done first!
# TCK BINARY CHECKBOX
For those of you who have not yet found your TCK and completed that checkbox. Your link is likely one of these:
- https://download.eclipse.org/ee4j/jakartaee-tck/jakartaee8-eftl/promoted/
If your link references a "latest.zip", that is not the right binary.
# TCK RESULTS
There was a tck results checkbox, it was replaced by the new checkbox "The URL of the compatibility certification request issue:"
# CERTIFICATION REQUEST
The URL of the compatibility certification request issue must be something like these:
- https://github.com/eclipse-ee4j/mail-spec/issues/1
- https://github.com/eclipse-ee4j/batch-tck/issues/1
- https://github.com/eclipse-ee4j/injection-spec/issues/3
You need to use the exact TCK linked in PR, not a snapshot or "latest.zip"
The TCK results must be hosted by the Compatible Implementation, not the Specification Project. Links to the Specification Project's CI (continuous integration, aka Jenkins job) are not valid.
# COMPATIBLE IMPLEMENTATION
The _index.md in your PR must list the Name and Version of the Compatible Implementation that filed the compatibility certification request. Acceptable examples:
- https://github.com/jakartaee/specifications/pull/3/files#diff-d72ca3f01299e61cc5b1fd90c8cc52e1R34
- https://github.com/jakartaee/specifications/pull/63/files#diff-74c859868fe2d9c9b5fc4558f9839493R28
- https://github.com/jakartaee/specifications/pull/14/files#diff-207016c01de902da42c71f133c360c1bR33
It is not the name and version of your spec.
A PR cannot be put to vote without at least one Compatible Implementation. One or more is required.
You cannot use a modified Compatible Implementation such as GlassFish 5.1 with modified API jars.
--
David Blevins
http://twitter.com/dblevins
http://www.tomitribe.com
_______________________________________________
jakartaee-spec-project-leads mailing list
jakartaee-spec-project-leads@xxxxxxxxxxx
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/jakartaee-spec-project-leads
_______________________________________________ jakartaee-spec-project-leads mailing list jakartaee-spec-project-leads@xxxxxxxxxxxTo change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/jakartaee-spec-project-leads
|
