|Re: [microprofile-wg] [External] : [BALLOT] MicroProfile TCK Process|
For the next review/update of this process, I'd like to make the following observations:
Packaging requirements: Jakarta EE is struggling with the requirement that forcing the ancillary (supporting documentation, guides, coverage, and assertion documents) into the TCK binary is problematic for publication to central repositories such as Maven central. We are currently working on an effort to update the packaging aspect of these requirements. MicroProfile may want to consider updates along these lines itself, or perhaps wait until after Jakarta EE determines what changes it will allow and then follow suit.
Test changes in Service Releases
The very final clause of the document (that service releases '... may have test changes...') might be considered for update in a future revision
In the past, we tried to adhere to the rule -- Once a test is formally adopted, it cannot change -- If the Spec. dev. team receives a challenge and it feels that a specific test must remain but the test must be altered, we allowed that an Alternative test could be provided in the TCK. If an alternative is offered the vendor could choose to run the original test, or the alternative test and they are considered equivalent for the purposes of compatibility verification. The goal was existing tests cannot be changed in anything less than a minor release. Successfully challenged tests may be excluded OR, they may remain and either the original or the alternative may be chosen by the vendor.
Alternative tests were rarely utilized. The decision to provide an alternative test or simply exclude that test would be at the discretion of the Spec. development group. Allowing a general assertion like this seems difficult to manage, in my opinion. I would discourage groups from attempting to change the TCK tests themselves in service releases.
-- Ed Bratt
On 2/9/2022 3:10 PM, Emily Jiang via microprofile-wg wrote:
As agreed on yesterday's MicroProfile Technical call, I have now merged the PR of MicroProfile TCK Process from David and myself. The TCK process can be viewed from here.
To approve and ratify the MicroProfile TCK Process, the Steering Committee Representatives' vote is requested. Please respond with +1 (positive), 0 (abstain), or -1 (reject). Any feedback that you can provide to support your vote will be appreciated.
According to MicroProfile Specification Process, This ballot runs for seven days and ends on February 16th. The ballot requires a Super-majority positive vote of the Steering Committee members. There is no veto. Community input and Community votes are welcomed. However, only the votes delivered by Steering Committee Representatives will be counted.
Emily Jiang on behalf of MicroProfile Steering Committee
_______________________________________________ microprofile-wg mailing list microprofile-wg@xxxxxxxxxxx To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/microprofile-wg__;!!ACWV5N9M2RV99hQ!dYvjMIdjy9BqGFF1e13xlIoJDKgVt4G1YrFZWY-wg2e93BYHsdQduQJZ7feTKl0$
_______________________________________________ microprofile-wg mailing list microprofile-wg@xxxxxxxxxxx To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/microprofile-wg
Back to the top