On 24/03/2009, ant elder <ant.el...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Tue, Mar 24, 2009 at 10:40 AM, Rony G. Flatscher > <rony.flatsc...@wu-wien.ac.at> wrote: > > Hi there, > > > >> Modified: jakarta/bsf/trunk/bsf3/RELEASE_NOTES > >> URL: > http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/jakarta/bsf/trunk/bsf3/RELEASE_NOTES?rev=757581&r1=757580&r2=757581&view=diff > >> > ============================================================================== > >> --- jakarta/bsf/trunk/bsf3/RELEASE_NOTES (original) > >> +++ jakarta/bsf/trunk/bsf3/RELEASE_NOTES Mon Mar 23 22:59:29 2009 > >> @@ -1,9 +1,9 @@ > >> -Apache BSF 3 Beta3 Release Notes > >> --------------------------------- > >> - > >> -Apache BSF 3 is an implementation of JSR-223, the Scripting for the Java > Platform APIs. > >> -Note that this software hasn't been tested with the JSR 223 TCK, and > therefore is not a > >> -compatible implementation of JSR-223. > >> - > >> -This 3.0-beta3 release is a maintenance release update to support for > the latest releases > >> -of various script language engines. > >> +Apache BSF 3 Beta3 Release Notes > >> +-------------------------------- > >> + > >> +Apache BSF 3 is an implementation of JSR-223, the Scripting for the Java > Platform APIs. > >> +Note that this software hasn't been tested with the JSR 223 TCK, and > therefore is not a > >> +compatible implementation of JSR-223. > >> + > >> +This 3.0-beta3 release is a maintenance release update to support for > the latest releases > >> +of various script language engines. > >> > >> Propchange: jakarta/bsf/trunk/bsf3/RELEASE_NOTES > >> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >> svn:eol-style = native > >> > > Although we have no TCK of JSR-223 (package javax.script) to run BSF3 > > against, we still are compatible to the specification! As such any > > JSR-223 scripting language and scripts should be able to run against > > BSF3. One important point about BSF3 is the possibility it opens to let > > Java 1.4 and 5 use JSR-223 scripting. > > > > Now, not being a native English speaker I cannot really come up with a > > text that expresses this (we implement the documented "javax.script" > > package and as such it is compatible with the specifications, but the > > concrete implementation of Java 6 of java.scriptx may differ in > > behaviour slightly, which only could be tested if having the TCK for > > JSR-223 available to us, which it is not). > > > > Maybe you could come up with some sentence that could make that clear, > > as otherwise I fear that interested potential users are shied away, > > expecting BSF3 not to be compatible with JSR-223? > > > > Regards, > > > > ---rony > > > > That sentence is a direct copy from an email when this was discussed a > while back [1], though I agree it could sound better. How about > changing "is not a compatible implementation" to "can not claim to be > a compatible implementation", so: > > "Apache BSF 3 is an implementation of JSR-223, the Scripting for the > Java Platform APIs. Note that this software hasn't been tested with > the JSR 223 TCK, and therefore can not claim to be a compatible > implementation of JSR-223."
Seems good to me, though I think it could go further. Is it a complete implementation, i.e. are all aspects of the API implemented? Are there tests for all aspects of the API, including edge-cases? If the TCK were used, are the developers confident would it pass? > ...ant > > [1] http://apache.markmail.org/message/ly67fgalxi3aej73 > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: bsf-dev-unsubscr...@jakarta.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: bsf-dev-h...@jakarta.apache.org > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: bsf-dev-unsubscr...@jakarta.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: bsf-dev-h...@jakarta.apache.org
