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 12/1/22 2:59 AM, Olivier Lamy wrote:


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

No worries.
Thanks, will look soon (tried on github but its too large of course :-) which is typical for Platform TCK changes) .

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


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?

It looks like Simple2HttpSvc is extending the jakarta.xml.ws.Service API in an application specific way.

are the modules webservices12 and webservices12 still used?

They are optional and still valid for EE 10 but not sure yet of what will be removed from EE 11.

Consider removing the webservice12 + webservices13 sub-module from the root pom (perhaps comment it out and have the comment indicate "TODO: implement or remove optional webservices12/webservices13 tests" or something like that). 


 
 


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. 

Scott
 

 
 


Scott



On Sun, Nov 20, 2022 at 4:53 PM Olivier Lamy <olamy@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Hi,
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.

cheers
Olivier 



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

Hi,

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? 

Scott

[1] https://docs.openrewrite.org/getting-started
[2] https://github.com/scottmarlow/jakartaee-tck/tree/rewrite
[3] https://gist.github.com/scottmarlow/a2b388e0be13bb51c4b33f263ccd7ce7
[4] https://github.com/jakartaee/platform-tck/tree/tckrefactor

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


--
Olivier


--
Olivier

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


--
Olivier


--
Olivier

Back to the top