Skip to main content

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
Re: [jakartaee-tck-dev] Preparing to hack with ReWrite...

On Thu, Dec 1, 2022 at 1:49 AM Scott Marlow <smarlow@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Sorry for the delay in responding.  

No worries.

I have a lot of modules now compiling (some content has been moved to a glassfishtck module for future removal)

yup it's an interface extending a class!
I don't even understand why this doesn't fail building master branch?

What should I do with such class?
are the modules webservices12 and webservices12 still used?


On Tue, Nov 22, 2022 at 4:03 AM Olivier Lamy <olamy@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Tue, Nov 22, 2022 at 3:21 AM Scott Marlow <smarlow@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On 11/20/22 8:31 PM, Olivier Lamy wrote:
I have started some work. 
But is there any reason to split runtime and glassfishtck?

On a case by case basis, IMO we should move sources that we don't think are going to be needed by the actual refactored TCK tests, into a `to_be_deleted_later` folder.

It would also be good to isolate the GlassFish TCK into a separate folder that other test sources do not reference. 

Trying to have a clean (e.g at least compiling) I have to re enable those modules.
And there are some circular dependencies between both.
At the end of the day, those modules will be removed?

I think the test harness and other runtime sources will be removed as they serve no purpose. 

I'm not sure about the GlassFish TCK porting kit.  David, Guru, Alwin do you have a preference for where the GlassFish TCK porting kit should live? 

Can I assume to replace throws Fault by throws Exception (e,g replace all usage of Fault by Exception)?

That sounds like a reasonable change to me.
I did that in servlet refactoring.

Is everything from the runtime module supposed to go?

Yes, I think so. 

I think that some of the common module contents should also go except for parts needed for tests. 
There are a lot of circular dependencies currently.

Yes there are.  :)
Those packages from runtime com.sun.ts.lib.deliverable.* causes some issues.
Can I simply remove them?

Yes, I think that makes sense. 




On Sun, Nov 20, 2022 at 4:53 PM Olivier Lamy <olamy@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
I'm not sure adding more tooling will fix anything (except making it more complicated by adding more tooling :)).
I have some issues on how the current tckrefactor build structure (e.g pom content), I have some changes in my branch with the servlet tck using arquilian. [1]
But I didn't to fix too many things in this branch as the merge/rebase will be an even worst nightmare for me :) 
Some content I have in mind which looks wrong (or I don't understand the reason) to my (long) Maven experience.
Why having everything in <dependencies> [2] in parent pom, this mean by example servlet or jsp will have batch or jms as dependency?
Why having this section with m-enforcer-p [3] is every poms?
I don't understand the need of using of build-helper-m-p [4] in every poms? we probably only need to have the sources in the standard Maven location.

If your concern is about having a clean build (e.g no compile issue) in the tckrefactor branch if you need a volunteer I can have a try for the next few days.


On Sat, Nov 19, 2022 at 12:54 AM Scott Marlow <smarlow@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:


I am finding that in order to use ReWrite [1] to make source changes in our `tckrefactor` branch, we need to first get to zero build failures.  My `rewrite` topic branch [2] has some changes but more changes are needed to resolve build failures such as [3].  My question for all of you is how can we best get the `tckrefactor` branch building cleanly? 

Is there anything that I can do to help others to participate in the clean up? 



jakartaee-tck-dev mailing list
To unsubscribe from this list, visit



jakartaee-tck-dev mailing list
To unsubscribe from this list, visit



Back to the top