I completely agree with Kevin.
Kevin Sutter wrote on 9/4/19 6:42 PM:
David,
I think we're
mixing two scenarios...
1) As part
of the EJB Spec deliverable, we need to run the TCK. In this
case,
the TCK tests are part of the overall Jakarta EE TCK. This is
similar
to the Management API and Managed Beans, as you outlined below.
There
really is not much difference whether we re-use the Glassfish
Certification
Request or create separate EJB/Mgmt API/Managed Beans
Certification Requests.
But, the creation of separate CRs does indicate the eventual
intent
of having a separate TCK. There is very little difference in
the
content of the two CRs.
2) The
second
scenario you referenced is whether Open Liberty plans to submit
a separate
CR for EJB compliance. Given the upcoming deadline, our only
interest
at this point is to be Full Platform and possibly Web Profile
compliant.
For the announce date, we don't really care if we're listed on
the
individual component pages (EJB, Servlet, JSF, etc).
Eventually,
we will do this extra work and submit the additional CRs. But,
our
first focus is to get Full Platform and Web Profile compliance.
I hope you
can
see that these are two completely separate scenarios.
---------------------------------------------------
Kevin Sutter
STSM, MicroProfile and Jakarta EE architect
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:
Jakarta
specification committee
<jakarta.ee-spec.committee@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date:
09/04/2019
08:26 PM
Subject:
[EXTERNAL]
Re: [jakarta.ee-spec.committee] Certification Requests for
Specifications with no TCK
Sent
by: jakarta.ee-spec.committee-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
Where we left this topic to day
is
still unclear to me. Here's what I understood from today's
call:
- Must GlassFish file a certification request with the EJB
project: yes,
cause rules
- Must OpenLiberty file a certification request with the EJB
project:
no, cause they don't want to
I've filed and approved a request on behalf of the GlassFish
project so
my part is done:
- https://github.com/eclipse-ee4j/ejb-api/issues/56
My primary position on today's call was we should be honest
with ourselves
on if a rule is providing enough value to be worth it. IMO,
rules
are a form of technical debt. When we say one thing and
immediately
do another, it's a sign the debt isn't (yet) worth it.
My ambitions commonly outpace my actions, so it's something I
aggressively
watch for. Probably still not enough :)
--
David Blevins
http://twitter.com/dblevins
http://www.tomitribe.com
> On Aug 26, 2019, at 5:42 PM, David Blevins
<dblevins@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
>
> We appear to have been inconsistently handling now we're
supposed
to handle certification for Specifications with no TCK.
>
> Kevin filed for both the Spec and Platform:
>
> - https://github.com/jakartaee/specifications/pull/75
> - https://github.com/jakartaee/specifications/pull/19
>
> Arjan did it only for the Spec and not the Platform:
>
> - https://github.com/jakartaee/specifications/pull/52
>
> I did it only for the Platform and not the Spec:
>
> - https://github.com/jakartaee/specifications/pull/91
> - https://github.com/jakartaee/specifications/pull/36
>
> We should discuss this Wednesday. Open questions using
Interceptor
as an example:
>
> - Is the Interceptor spec project, for example, supposed
to evaluate
all the CTS results or just the interceptor tests?
> - If the full results, is the Interceptor project
supposed now completely
understand full CTS certification requirements?
> - Can you call yourself Interceptor-certified if you pass
just the
Interceptor tests?
> - What would it mean if say the Interceptor project
rejected the full
CTS certification but the Platform accepted the same results?
> - What is the value this brings for the overhead it
creates?
>
> For Managed Beans it is particularly odd as we're filling
the same
request twice in the same project to be evaluated by the same
people.
>
>
> --
> David Blevins
> http://twitter.com/dblevins
> http://www.tomitribe.com
>
>
_______________________________________________
jakarta.ee-spec.committee mailing list
jakarta.ee-spec.committee@xxxxxxxxxxx
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or
unsubscribe
from this list, visit
https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/jakarta.ee-spec.committee
_______________________________________________
jakarta.ee-spec.committee mailing list
jakarta.ee-spec.committee@xxxxxxxxxxx
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit
https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/jakarta.ee-spec.committee
|
