| Re: [glassfish-dev] [jakartaee-tck-dev] GlassFish Passing the TCK |
Just a comment -- these need to be more than just a tag. We need to include the binary -- just like 6.0.0-M3-2020-10-04. (and not like M2-servlet5, which is just a tag).
We should also consider releasing web-profile versions, as well since presumably, we'll want feedback on both flavors.
Cheers,
-- Ed
On 10/15/20 5:13 AM, Steve Millidge (Payara) wrote:
Hi All,
Are we in agreement that GlassFish is currently passing the Full and Web Profile TCKs, the CDI TCKs and the other standalone TCKs?
Is it consensus view that we should tag a new milestone or RC for GlassFish or shall we wait for the TCK runs on Monday?
+1 for tagging a new something (milestone or RC).
Could we still put a hack solution in after tagging for https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://github.com/eclipse-ee4j/glassfish/issues/23191__;!!GqivPVa7Brio!O60vV5Daiyxm_f-Hjaod9FjcCZTcddjNQDQW7YUp4GhZxmL48b-EBzVg2-pZdxQ$ if no one identifies the actual needed code solution?
See possible hack solution mentioned on https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://github.com/eclipse-ee4j/glassfish/issues/23191*issuecomment-708977368__;Iw!!GqivPVa7Brio!O60vV5Daiyxm_f-Hjaod9FjcCZTcddjNQDQW7YUp4GhZxmL48b-EBzVgx6SAB3M$
Summary  test results
CDI TCK
https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://ci.eclipse.org/jakartaee-tck/job/cditck-porting/job/master/106/__;!!GqivPVa7Brio!O60vV5Daiyxm_f-Hjaod9FjcCZTcddjNQDQW7YUp4GhZxmL48b-EBzVg7KcYAu4$ <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://ci.eclipse.org/jakartaee-tck/job/cditck-porting/job/master/106/__;!!GqivPVa7Brio!O60vV5Daiyxm_f-Hjaod9FjcCZTcddjNQDQW7YUp4GhZxmL48b-EBzVg7KcYAu4$ >
It looks like https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://ci.eclipse.org/jakartaee-tck/job/bvtck-porting/job/master/98/__;!!GqivPVa7Brio!O60vV5Daiyxm_f-Hjaod9FjcCZTcddjNQDQW7YUp4GhZxmL48b-EBzVggYYSEfM$ passed
It looks like https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://ci.eclipse.org/jakartaee-tck/job/ditck-porting/job/master/97/console__;!!GqivPVa7Brio!O60vV5Daiyxm_f-Hjaod9FjcCZTcddjNQDQW7YUp4GhZxmL48b-EBzVgZnsI4rg$ passed as well.
Combined run of Full Profile
https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://ci.eclipse.org/jakartaee-tck/job/eftl-jakartaeetck-run-900/49/junit-reports-with-handlebars/testSuitesOverview.html__;!!GqivPVa7Brio!O60vV5Daiyxm_f-Hjaod9FjcCZTcddjNQDQW7YUp4GhZxmL48b-EBzVgyLGYz48$ <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://ci.eclipse.org/jakartaee-tck/job/eftl-jakartaeetck-run-900/49/junit-reports-with-handlebars/testSuitesOverview.html__;!!GqivPVa7Brio!O60vV5Daiyxm_f-Hjaod9FjcCZTcddjNQDQW7YUp4GhZxmL48b-EBzVgyLGYz48$ >
https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://ci.eclipse.org/jakartaee-tck/job/eftl-jakartaeetck-run-900/48/junit-reports-with-handlebars/testSuitesOverview.html__;!!GqivPVa7Brio!O60vV5Daiyxm_f-Hjaod9FjcCZTcddjNQDQW7YUp4GhZxmL48b-EBzVgcXLQxpY$ <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://ci.eclipse.org/jakartaee-tck/job/eftl-jakartaeetck-run-900/48/junit-reports-with-handlebars/testSuitesOverview.html__;!!GqivPVa7Brio!O60vV5Daiyxm_f-Hjaod9FjcCZTcddjNQDQW7YUp4GhZxmL48b-EBzVgcXLQxpY$ >
Combined Run of Web Profile
https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://ci.eclipse.org/jakartaee-tck/job/eftl-jakartaeetck-run-web-900/40/__;!!GqivPVa7Brio!O60vV5Daiyxm_f-Hjaod9FjcCZTcddjNQDQW7YUp4GhZxmL48b-EBzVgwK1J6js$ <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://ci.eclipse.org/jakartaee-tck/job/eftl-jakartaeetck-run-web-900/40/__;!!GqivPVa7Brio!O60vV5Daiyxm_f-Hjaod9FjcCZTcddjNQDQW7YUp4GhZxmL48b-EBzVgwK1J6js$ >
https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://ci.eclipse.org/jakartaee-tck/job/eftl-jakartaeetck-run-web-900/42/__;!!GqivPVa7Brio!O60vV5Daiyxm_f-Hjaod9FjcCZTcddjNQDQW7YUp4GhZxmL48b-EBzVgXgSAo88$ <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://ci.eclipse.org/jakartaee-tck/job/eftl-jakartaeetck-run-web-900/42/__;!!GqivPVa7Brio!O60vV5Daiyxm_f-Hjaod9FjcCZTcddjNQDQW7YUp4GhZxmL48b-EBzVgXgSAo88$ >
and my understanding is that we also don’t have standalone failures suggest that we are passing all tests at the moment.
Yes and https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://github.com/eclipse-ee4j/jakartaee-tck/wiki/Jakarta-EE-9-TCK-results__;!!GqivPVa7Brio!O60vV5Daiyxm_f-Hjaod9FjcCZTcddjNQDQW7YUp4GhZxmL48b-EBzVgcsGAFvU$ agrees with that!
We also ran some Full Platform testing last night that essentially includes the keywords"corba&rmiiop" and the tests marked to be included with those keywords still also pass.
We are still discussing making further changes to the EJB test classes that use org.omg.CORBA.ORB classes. We will ensure that any such changes merged do not introduce failures with GlassFish 6.0 testing.
Does the fact that we are considering making further Platform TCK test changes that will not cause GlassFish 6.0 (or any other implementation) TCK test failures, change whether we tag GlassFish now?
It may be a platform level decision on whether we accept such changes versus waiting until after EE 9 final but we need to complete our due diligence which includes reviewing any further pull requests that are created. Please follow https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.eclipse.org/lists/jakartaee-tck-dev/msg01042.html__;!!GqivPVa7Brio!O60vV5Daiyxm_f-Hjaod9FjcCZTcddjNQDQW7YUp4GhZxmL48b-EBzVghq9SGjY$ mail thread for updates.
Hope this helps,
Scott
Steve
_______________________________________________
jakartaee-tck-dev mailing list
jakartaee-tck-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe from this list, visit https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/jakartaee-tck-dev__;!!GqivPVa7Brio!O60vV5Daiyxm_f-Hjaod9FjcCZTcddjNQDQW7YUp4GhZxmL48b-EBzVgFsU4qwk$
_______________________________________________
glassfish-dev mailing list
glassfish-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe from this list, visit https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/glassfish-dev__;!!GqivPVa7Brio!O60vV5Daiyxm_f-Hjaod9FjcCZTcddjNQDQW7YUp4GhZxmL48b-EBzVga50-FK0$