i agree with mark. regards, gerhard
http://www.irian.at Your JSF powerhouse - JSF Consulting, Development and Courses in English and German Professional Support for Apache MyFaces 2010/10/2 Mark Struberg <[email protected]> > Oki, sorry for not being specific enough. I'll try to rephrase what I mean: > > If we pass the open JSR-303 TCK, then we can claim to be 'JSR-303 > compatible' and 'successfully passed the JSR-303 TCK'. > > But for calling us 'Sun/Oracle TCK JSR-303 certified' then we would of > course need to go the official oracle route. > > makes sense? > > LieGrue, > strub > > --- On Fri, 10/1/10, David Jencks <[email protected]> wrote: > > > From: David Jencks <[email protected]> > > Subject: Re: svn commit: r1002445 - > /incubator/bval/trunk/bval-tck/pom.xml > > To: [email protected] > > Date: Friday, October 1, 2010, 11:04 PM > > > > On Oct 1, 2010, at 3:22 PM, Mark Struberg wrote: > > > > > isn't the JSR-303 ASL-2 licensed [1]? > > > > > > So I don't think we need to wait for any special > > Oracle agreement! > > > > > > If you like, then I could ping Emmanuel, but usually > > the latest TCK is available in the jboss maven repo. > > > > I think it makes sense to run both for now. Since its > > a jcp managed spec, to claim compliance, I think we have > > to run the tck from the official jcp channels, which, > > unless we hear something different from Oracle, is Oracle. > > > > Can we put the choice of tck in a couple profiles? > > > > david jencks > > > > > > > > LieGrue, > > > strub > > > > > > > > > [1] > http://docs.jboss.org/hibernate/stable/beanvalidation/tck/reference/html_single/ > > > > > > > > > --- On Fri, 10/1/10, Donald Woods <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > > > >> From: Donald Woods <[email protected]> > > >> Subject: Re: svn commit: r1002445 - > > /incubator/bval/trunk/bval-tck/pom.xml > > >> To: [email protected] > > >> Date: Friday, October 1, 2010, 10:14 PM > > >> Hopefully Kevan will chime in too, > > >> but it's my understanding that we > > >> have to pass the BVAL TCK as provided by Oracle > > under the > > >> Oracle/ASF NDA > > >> in order to claim we're certified.... > > >> > > >> During daily testing, I use the TCK files > > downloaded from > > >> the JBoss > > >> repo. Before we release the Apache BVAL > > artifacts, I > > >> always run the > > >> release artifacts against the TCK as provided by > > Oracle. > > >> > > >> > > >> -Donald > > >> > > >> > > >> On 10/1/10 2:14 PM, Matt Benson wrote: > > >>> > > >>> On Oct 1, 2010, at 12:26 PM, Donald Woods > > wrote: > > >>> > > >>>> The current BVAL TCK from Oracle that we > > have to > > >> certify with is > > >>>> jsr303-tck-1.0.3.GA-dist.zip, which uses > > the > > >> 1.0.3.GA level of the API. > > >>>> > > >>> > > >>> Apparently I am not fully cognizant of the > > TCK-related > > >> aspects of the JCP process. > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/BeanValidation/JSR303+TCK > > >> says: > > >>> TBD - Need to ask if we must use > > the > > >> Sun/Oracle provided TCK for final certification > > testing.... > > >>> > > >>> Have there been further developments in this > > >> regard? It was my impression that a spec > > >> implementation must simply pass the TCK supplied > > by the spec > > >> lead. I had no idea there was both an Oracle > > TCK and a > > >> JBoss TCK. Where I can learn more about > > certification > > >> as it applies to this JSR and our efforts? > > >>> > > >>>> If you look at the TCK that gets > > downloaded during > > >> the TCK build, those > > >>>> files also download the 1.0.3.GA level of > > the API > > >> and matches the > > >>>> distribution as provided by Oracle. > > >>>> > > >>> > > >>> I honestly don't see where you see this. > > I don't > > >> see any indication of it in > > bval-tck/target/dependency/lib > > >> or in the tck POM. > > >>> > > >>>> I haven't looked at the 1.0.4 level yet, > > so is > > >> there something in there > > >>>> that we need? What changes were > > introduced? > > >>>> > > >>> > > >>> My lack of understanding of the issues simply > > led me > > >> to believe that the more recent release of the > > spec we could > > >> pass, the better. In particular I had hoped > > that there > > >> might be a difference in TCK versions with regard > > to my > > >> allegations on the incorrectness of the RI > > implementation of > > >> the Path interface. > > >>> > > >>> -Matt > > >>> > > >>>> > > >>>> -Donald > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> On 10/1/10 12:37 PM, Matt Benson wrote: > > >>>>> > > >>>>> On Oct 1, 2010, at 11:18 AM, Donald > > Woods > > >> wrote: > > >>>>> > > >>>>>> Matt, the latest TCK drop from > > Oracle is > > >> 1.0.3, so I'd rather not move > > >>>>>> up until we have a newer TCK level > > that > > >> matches..... > > >>>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>>> I'm fine with whatever the community > > decides, > > >> of course, but can you explain the above? > > I'm afraid I > > >> don't understand... > > >>>>> > > >>>>> -Matt > > >>>>> > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> -Donald > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> On 9/28/10 9:53 PM, [email protected] > > >> wrote: > > >>>>>>> Author: mbenson > > >>>>>>> Date: Wed Sep 29 01:53:36 > > 2010 > > >>>>>>> New Revision: 1002445 > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1002445&view=rev > > >>>>>>> Log: > > >>>>>>> upgrade to tck version > > 1.0.4.GA > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> Modified: > > >>>>>>> > > incubator/bval/trunk/bval-tck/pom.xml > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> Modified: > > >> incubator/bval/trunk/bval-tck/pom.xml > > >>>>>>> URL: > http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/incubator/bval/trunk/bval-tck/pom.xml?rev=1002445&r1=1002444&r2=1002445&view=diff > > >>>>>>> > > >> > > > ============================================================================== > > >>>>>>> --- > > >> incubator/bval/trunk/bval-tck/pom.xml (original) > > >>>>>>> +++ > > >> incubator/bval/trunk/bval-tck/pom.xml Wed Sep 29 > > 01:53:36 > > >> 2010 > > >>>>>>> @@ -92,7 +92,7 @@ > > >>>>>>> > > > > >> <dependency> > > >>>>>>> > > > > >> > > >> > > <groupId>org.hibernate.jsr303.tck</groupId> > > >>>>>>> > > > > >> > > >> <artifactId>jsr303-tck</artifactId> > > >>>>>>> - > > > > >> > > >> <version>1.0.3.GA</version> > > >>>>>>> + > > > > >> > > >> <version>1.0.4.GA</version> > > >>>>>>> > > > > >> > > </dependency> > > >>>>>>> > > > > >> <dependency> > > >>>>>>> > > > > >> > > >> > > <groupId>org.jboss.test-harness</groupId> > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
