Skip to main content

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
Re: [jakartaee-platform-dev] TCK tests in the same repo as API andSpec

You are correct that MP is not consistent in this model, but that doesn't mean it's the right process to follow...  :-)  Seriously, I would like to see more consistency.  Allowing multiple test frameworks to be used across the whole Jakarta EE platform could be troublesome in the long run.  I like the idea of defining the proper dependencies and configuration in the parent pom and require/recommend all projects to use it.

Kevin Sutter
STSM, MicroProfile and Jakarta EE architect @ IBM
e-mail:  sutter@xxxxxxxxxx     Twitter:  @kwsutter
phone: tl-553-3620 (office), 507-253-3620 (office)    

From:        <dmitry.kornilov@xxxxxxxxxx>
To:        "'jakartaee-platform developer discussions'" <jakartaee-platform-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date:        02/05/2020 14:51
Subject:        [EXTERNAL] Re: [jakartaee-platform-dev] TCK tests in the same repo as        API        andSpec
Sent by:        jakartaee-platform-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx

If I remember well MicroProfile TCKs are not consistent with frameworks they use. Some of them are TestNG, some of them are JUnit. I think we all agree that It’s what we want to avoid. IMO, the best way to accomplish it is to create a TCK parent pom, define all dependencies there and recommend all projects to use it. We can place in the same repository where EE4J parent pom is.


-- Dmitry


From:jakartaee-platform-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx <jakartaee-platform-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx> On Behalf Of arjan tijms
Wednesday, February 5, 2020 9:41 PM
jakartaee-platform developer discussions <jakartaee-platform-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Re: [jakartaee-platform-dev] TCK tests in the same repo as API andSpec




On Wed, Feb 5, 2020 at 9:25 PM Andy Guibert <andy.guibert@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

B) Migrate TCK tests to the spec repo, as I have done with JSON-B here:


One thing I'd love to see there is a consistent use of the Arquillian container profile, or even have a strong recommendation Arquillian is used.


Additionally, though I'm not in any way a fan, all of MP (if I'm not mistaken) as well of CDI, BeanValidation and Batch use TestNG, not Junit. Perhaps it's best to have some consistency there as well.


I remember that in Java EE 7 samples we had the door open for "whatever" and essentially every test used another combination of technologies. The permutations must have been a dozen or more.


As test engineer it's not unlikely you have to jump between tests for different but related APIs., E.g. for Jakarta Faces I'd jump between Jakarta Servlet, Jakarta _expression_ Language, Jakarta WebSocket, and Jakarta Security. Having to adjust mindset every time would not be productive, especially since often there's no reason for a project to use technology X over technology Y other than that person A just started to use X and not Y.


As for the Arquillian and consistent use of profiles; as a Jakarta EE vendor I'd hate to write and maintain adapters and porting kits for every API in Jakarta EE. Ideally I provide 1 implementation to run all of the APIs that make up the full platform.


Kind regards,

Arjan Tijms










jakartaee-platform-dev mailing list
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit

Back to the top