Skip to main content
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
Re: [jakartaee-platform-dev] [External] : Re: Review of Platform TCK removal of duplicate Jakarta JSON Binding tests


On 3/1/22 4:55 AM, arjan tijms wrote:
Hi,

It would be great though if we have easy to run standalone tests for JSON to test that JSON works in a Microprofile environment. As far as I can see, the standalone tests now only run against the implementation jar, right? Not against an actual server.

Good question, the JSON-B TCK does test with jakarta.enterprise.inject.se.SeContainer but does not test with an EE server. 

Some Standalone TCKs do currently require an actual server, for example the Concurrency TCK (see Concurrency TCK readme link).  Do Microprofile implementations need to run the Standalone Concurrency TCK?

Scott


For instance, if I wanted to test that JSON works correctly in say Helidon or my own Piranha Cloud, how would I currently go about that?

Kind regards,
Arjan Tijms

On Mon, Feb 28, 2022 at 3:58 PM Scott Marlow <smarlow@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:


On 2/28/22 7:54 AM, Dmitry Kornilov wrote:

There are enough JSONB tests in the Platform TCK to see that integration doesn’t work.

Dmitry, 

Are you arguing that Jakarta EE 10 Platform certification requests should not include Standalone JSON-B TCK test results?  I agree that there are enough JSONB tests in the Platform TCK to see that integration doesn’t work (at all) but I think the Standlone JSON-B TCK test could find unexpected problems.

I think that Emily and others have argued that Jakarta EE 10 Platform certification requests should include Standalone JSON-B TCK test results.  I think there are more people in favor of this than those that are against but we could ask Platform committers to vote if needed.  If the Platform committers does vote on this point, it would need to be documented as so in the Platform TCK User Guide which I think is the only place where we list which TCKs must be run for Platform compatibility certification requests.

From our TCK call, I recall your point was about eliminating duplicate tests between Platform TCK and the new Standalone TCKs, which we are putting into action via pending Platform TCK pull requests that need to be reviewed still.

Scott


 

Thanks,

Dmitry

 

From: jakartaee-platform-dev <jakartaee-platform-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx> On Behalf Of Emily Jiang via jakartaee-platform-dev
Sent: 28 февраля 2022 г. 13:30
To: jakartaee-platform developer discussions <jakartaee-platform-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Emily Jiang <emijiang6@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [External] : Re: [jakartaee-platform-dev] Review of Platform TCK removal of duplicate Jakarta JSON Binding tests

 

I am concerned with this discussion and the fact that the implementations do not need to or can't run the standalone tests in JSON-B. Let's give you an example.

If a runtime A uses Yasson for their JSON-B 3.0 implementation and it does not integrate well with Yasson, it should not be able to claim certification for JSON-B 3.0. However, since JSON-B standalone TCK is not required/able to be executed, how can we verify whether a runtime is JSON-B 3.0 compatible? As for the platform integration tests, I don't think it is sufficient to cover the full picture as they focus on how to interact with other Jakarta EE specs.

Thanks

Emily

 

On Thu, Feb 24, 2022 at 11:09 PM Scott Marlow <smarlow@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

 

On 2/24/22 3:49 PM, Nathan Rauh wrote:

Scott,

 

Do you mean to instead say that “every JSON-B 3.0 implementation must pass the Standalone JSON Binding TCK” ?

 

When phrased as, “every Jakarta EE 10 implementation must pass the Standalone JSON Binding TCK”, (below) it is unachievable for application servers because the arquillian support is gone from the Standalone JSON Binding TCK leaving no way to run it in a container (The issue raised by Kyle).

Every JSON-B 3.0 implementation must still pass the Standalone JSON Binding TCK, that is certainly true and wouldn't change.

Application servers should be able to pass the Java SE style tests in the Standalone JSON Binding TCK, with the JSON-B SPEC API + implementation that they are using. 

There will also be a set of Platform TCK tests that verify that JSON-B can be used in the required EE containers.  From the feedback so far, the number of Platform TCK JSON-B tests should be small to minimize code duplication between the TCKs. 

Scott

 

 

From: jakartaee-platform-dev <jakartaee-platform-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx> on behalf of Scott Marlow <smarlow@xxxxxxxxxx>
Reply-To: jakartaee-platform developer discussions <jakartaee-platform-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thursday, February 24, 2022 at 2:00 PM
To: jsonb developer discussions <jsonb-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: "jakartaee-tck-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx" <jakartaee-tck-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>, jakartaee-platform developer discussions <jakartaee-platform-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [jakartaee-platform-dev] Review of Platform TCK removal of duplicate Jakarta JSON Binding tests

 

Updated as per feedback from Brian Decker:

 

On Tue, Feb 22, 2022 at 1:25 PM Scott Marlow <smarlow@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Hi,

We need to verify that the Jakarta EE 10 Platform requirements for use of JSON Binding API are met by reviewing the  [1][2] pull requests.  Wiki [3] has notes on the Platform requirements.  In summary, every Jakarta EE 10 implementation must pass the Standalone JSON-B TCK which validates that Application Client, Servlet, Server Pages, and Enterprise Beans can use the JSON Binding API successfully. 

Correction: In summary, every Jakarta EE 10 implementation must pass the Standalone JSON Binding TCK which validates the JSON Binding implementation can pass the JSON Binding TCK successfully.

 

Scott

 

Any contributor in the community can review the [1][2] pull requests and provide feedback there (or ask questions there).  Any feedback provided here in response to this email is not considered part of the pull request review.  The Platform team (and others) may want to consider whether all of the Platform SPEC requirements for JSON Binding will still be validated after the [1][2] pull requests are merged.

Thanks all,
Scott

[1] https://github.com/eclipse-ee4j/jakartaee-tck/pull/848
[2] https://github.com/eclipse-ee4j/jakartaee-tck/pull/849
[3] https://github.com/eclipse-ee4j/jakartaee-platform/wiki/Guidelines_For_Standalone_TCKs

 

 

 

_______________________________________________
jakartaee-platform-dev mailing list
jakartaee-platform-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe from this list, visit https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/jakartaee-platform-dev

_______________________________________________
jakartaee-platform-dev mailing list
jakartaee-platform-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe from this list, visit https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/jakartaee-platform-dev



--

Thanks
Emily


_______________________________________________
jakartaee-platform-dev mailing list
jakartaee-platform-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe from this list, visit https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/jakartaee-platform-dev
_______________________________________________
jakartaee-platform-dev mailing list
jakartaee-platform-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe from this list, visit https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/jakartaee-platform-dev

_______________________________________________
jakartaee-platform-dev mailing list
jakartaee-platform-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe from this list, visit https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/jakartaee-platform-dev

Back to the top