Skip to main content

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
[jakartaee-tck-dev] Issue with sigtest-maven-plugin - no easy way to validate no new "subpackages" added?

I found an issue experimenting with the sigtest-maven-plugin  (org.netbeans.tools:sigtest-maven-plugin:1.5) we're using in the Batch, and other TCKs.

While this seems like it'd be a very minor issue if found earlier, this late in the cycle I'm not sure we'll get an ideal solution.

The problem is it doesn't seem to currently provide a way to ensure that no new packages have been added.

E.g Jakarta Batch API includes packages:

jakarta.batch.api
jakarta.batch.api.chunk
jakarta.batch.api.listener

BUT I don't see a way to prevent an impl from providing, say, a bogus jakarta.batch.api.dummy package.

It's possible I'm missing how this is supposed to work.  However, I think it's just a simple bug.

I put in a PR:  https://github.com/jtulach/netbeans-apitest/pull/10/files  but note sure when to expect a response.   As you can see in the PR, it seems the -Package option needs to be used, rather than the -PackageWithoutSubpackages option.

I'm not sure I could find a place in the process where this is required... but I vaguely recall in the Java EE timeframe thinking this type of validation was required.

Besides the standalone Batch TCK, I see the CDI TCK using this approach, it looks like:  https://github.com/eclipse-ee4j/cdi-tck/blob/58bdab7b2d4b31fa28356f3530f3af56d1f87019/impl/src/main/resources/sigtest-pom.xml
---

Thinking ahead, our options might be:

1. Work with owner to get a release in time (do we have any other issues?)
2. Ship our own plugin fork (either in an individual TCK or somewhere else)
3.  rework Maven to exec the underlying executable rather than going through the plugin
4. Agree at the platform level we can tolerate this gap in validation.

Thoughts,
------------------------------------------------------
Scott Kurz
WebSphere / Open Liberty Batch and Developer Experience
skurz@xxxxxxxxxx
--------------------------------------------------------



Back to the top