Skip to main content

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
Re: [] TCK URLs...

On Aug 5, 2020, at 12:56 PM, Kevin Sutter <sutter@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

I'm finding several inconsistencies with the TCK references in the Specification PRs, especially with the directory structures and expected locations.

In the file for the TCK location, we should be specifying this directory structure:{spec}/x.y/jakarta-{spec}  (this is in our checklist, so I think we're good with this)

But, where should the "staged" version of the TCK be located?  We have an item in the PR checklist to identify the staged location.  I have seen the following directory structures being referenced... an example)

With Jakarta EE 8, it looks like we expected the TCKs to be staged in the "promoted"directory (per a quick sampling of the past PRs - except for cdi and bv...).  How the TCKs get to the "staged-900" and "promoted" directories is a mystery to me.  We started to discuss it on this morning's Spec Committee call.  Maybe we can continue this conversation here instead of waiting for next week's call...

Personally, I just want a complete link that includes the zip file.  As long as the file on the other side of the link is not getting overwritten and stable enough to last a complete PR cycle, I don't care where the project decided to put it.

I'm not a fan of having a directory put in front of me.  I could guess the wrong file, I could accidentally promote the wrong file.  I can't write code to further improve the promotion script so we could perhaps just point at the PR and have it pull out everything that needs promoting.  Then there's miscommunication opportunities: "Well of course that zip file has been overwritten, everyone on our project knows that directory is for nightly builds.  The real TCK should be done in time for the vote to complete."

In short, we don't promote directories we promote a zip file.  Give me a zip file and I'm happy.  Give me a directory and now we have to have discussions I'd prefer to avoid.

That's my $0.02 at least.


Back to the top