Hi Scott,
I might have misinterpreted https://www.eclipse.org/lists/jakartaee-spec-project-leads/msg00413.html - perhaps we want both the Jakarta EE 8 and Jakarta EE 9 signatures on master? If so, we might need to keep javax.transaction.sig_1.3_se8 (if that was indeed the Jakarta EE 8 version). However, I would think that removing javax.transaction.sig_1.2_se8 at least would be consistent with that message (if it can be).
We should ensure that we have signature files for se8/se11 signature files for each Jakarta EE 9 SPEC API.
For signature files that are not used, do we need to keep those or can we delete them?
If it is not relevant due to not being supported as an API or Java SE release, I would remove it.
I am wondering if it would help to have an external list somewhere of all the Jakarta EE 9 SPEC API classes, so that one could (via inspection by humans initially) validate that we have the correct signatures in the Platform TCK? If yes, I propose a simple script that generates an asciidoc/text file containing all of the said EE 9 classes, that could be merged to a central repo. This generated document could be considered the truth of exactly which classes in EE 9 applications should use the jakarta package as well. If we already have this, please mention the link, so we can reference it in future conversations. :)
It is not that difficult to read the sig files. Do you really feel that would add that much value as from my experience with CTS dating back to J2EE 1.2, the sig files were enough. Though you might be trying to make it easier for a different audience?
Best Lance
Perhaps we could also have a script that validates that the EE 9 Platform TCK signature files do represent all of the classes identified by the external list of EE 9 classes (the script could generate that list as well, instead of reading the list from the external asciidoc file).
Hope this helps, Scott
As a reminder, all
APIs need to be at the Java SE 8 source and binary levels. The implementations
need to support Java SE 11, but the APIs still need to be at the Java SE
8 level. I'm not exactly clear on how these signature files get processed
for the TCK, but when I see items proposed to be deleted related to Java
SE 8 and APIs, it makes me nervous... Thanks.
---------------------------------------------------
Kevin Sutter
STSM, MicroProfile and Jakarta EE architect @ IBM
e-mail: sutter@xxxxxxxxxx Twitter: @kwsutter
phone: tl-553-3620 (office), 507-253-3620 (office)
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/kevinwsutter
From:
Tom
Jenkinson <tom.jenkinson@xxxxxxxxxx>
To:
Alwin
Joseph <alwin.joseph@xxxxxxxxxx>
Cc:
jakartaee-tck
developer discussions <jakartaee-tck-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date:
06/10/2020
11:44
Subject:
[EXTERNAL]
Re: [jakartaee-tck-dev] Jakarta Transaction signatures (maybe
others)
Sent
by: jakartaee-tck-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
I whatever you provided as [1] was not
included in your message?
But Glassfish master seems to be using
2.0.0-RC2: https://github.com/eclipse-ee4j/glassfish/blob/master/appserver/pom.xml#L130.
That version you can find in staging: https://jakarta.oss.sonatype.org/content/groups/staging/jakarta/transaction/jakarta.transaction-api/2.0.0-RC2/
On Wed, 10 Jun 2020 at 16:03, Alwin Joseph
<alwin.joseph@xxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
Hi Tom,
As of now we have generated new signature
file to be run in JDK8 as jakarta.transaction.sig_2.0_se8(using [1],
Is this the same jar that is integrated to glassfish ?)
The sig tests currently pass in standalone mode, but fails in jsp &
servlet vehicles, this needs to be investigated.
We will remove the javax.* and also update the jakarta.transaction.sig_1.2_se11
as jakarta.transaction.sig_2.0_se11 to be run in JDK11.
Regards,
Alwin
On 10/06/20 7:18 pm, Tom Jenkinson wrote:
Hi,
I am not very familiar with the requirements
on signatures, but when I look at https://www.eclipse.org/lists/jakartaee-spec-project-leads/msg00413.htmland at https://github.com/eclipse-ee4j/jakartaee-tck/tree/master/src/com/sun/ts/tests/signaturetest/signature-repository,
for Jakarta Transactions I am thinking:
1. We need to add a jakarta.transaction.sig_2.0_se11
(I am not sure what would go in there though)
2. The following should be removed:
* jakarta.transaction.sig_1.2_se11
* javax.transaction.sig_1.2_se8
* javax.transaction.sig_1.3_se8
Thanks for your assistance,
Tom
_______________________________________________
jakartaee-tck-dev mailing list
jakartaee-tck-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe from this list, visit https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/jakartaee-tck-dev
_______________________________________________
jakartaee-tck-dev mailing list
jakartaee-tck-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe from this list, visit https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/jakartaee-tck-dev
_______________________________________________
jakartaee-tck-dev mailing list
jakartaee-tck-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe from this list, visit https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/jakartaee-tck-dev
jakartaee-tck-dev mailing list
jakartaee-tck-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe from this list, visit https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/jakartaee-tck-dev
_______________________________________________ jakartaee-tck-dev mailing list jakartaee-tck-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxTo unsubscribe from this list, visit https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/jakartaee-tck-dev
Lance Andersen| Principal Member of Technical Staff | +1.781.442.2037Oracle Java Engineering 1 Network Drive Burlington, MA 01803Lance.Andersen@xxxxxxxxxx
|
