Re: [jakartaee-platform-dev] [DISCUSS] Strategy for putting Web Profile

[Arjan Tijms <arjan.tijms@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi,

+1 for at least dropping the app client tests as in the proposal.

I'd like to reiterate that there is a potential BIG COST to continuing on the current path. We still don't really have an idea how much more time it will still take to get all partially refactored tests up and running again. After every mountain there may be another mountain. 

I heard someone saying on the call that if we can release in late January or so with all tests passing that would be better.

But nobody ever said we'll have everything done in January. There's nearly zero guarantee for that. It might as well be September 2025 or even later before we pass everything.

So to me the question is more:

"Do you want us to be more than a full year(!) behind our own schedule and behind specifically Spring, just to get some obscure tests to pass for a technology almost nobody ever used and certainly will not ever use in the future?"

Kind regards,

Arjan Tijms

On Tue, 26 Nov 2024 at 18:27, Ed Burns via jakartaee-platform-dev <jakartaee-platform-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Greetings Programs,

At the 2024-11-26 Platform Project call, an idea was surfaced, I think originally by Emily, to separate the ballot submissions of Web Profile from Platform Profile. This thread is intended to discuss and determine the feasibility of this idea.

First, there were at least two questions in the Platform Project call that need answers right away:

• Would this idea help solve the problem of not having to exclude many tests?
• Consider this statement from the Platform Project agenda:
  Scott clarified that the “appclient” tests in question aren’t actually testing App Client itself, but use app client to call EJBs where (some of) the JPA tests are run.
• Q.1: Given this fact, does the Web Profile TCK include tests that use application client technology? If the answer is yes, this idea is moot.
• Q.2: How tightly coupled are the Web Profile and Platform Profile TCKs?
• Can they even be run independently?
• How much complexity would we be introducing by separating them?

Second I want to state some facts about the relationship between application client and the Web Profile and Platform Profile specifications:

• Application Client is only mentioned twice in the Web Profile specification, in section "2.10.1. Bean archive with EJB Session Beans":
• When determining which archives are bean archives, the container must also consider:
• EJB jars or application client jars
• 
  
• The WEB-INF/classes directory of a war
• 
  
• The container is not required to support application client jar bean archives.
• Application Client has an entire chapter in the Platform Profile specification, chapter 10. Overall, there are 188 mentions of application client in the Platform Profile specification.
• Application Client is not even a factor in the Web Profile.

Given that there is no TCK call tomorrow, 2024-11-27, and no Platform Project call next week, 2024-12-03, this [DISCUSS] thread is very important to progress. I look for responses from Guru, Scott Marlow, Emily, Jan, and anyone else who joined the discussion about this in the meeting.

Thanks,

Ed

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