+1 for using the latest official version. regards, gerhard
http://www.irian.at Your JSF powerhouse - JSF Consulting, Development and Courses in English and German Professional Support for Apache MyFaces 2011/6/15 Matt Benson <[email protected]> > jsr303-tck v1.0.5.GA came out today. This question is still open. I > remind the group that one codebase *cannot* simultaneously pass a TCK > < v1.0.5 and one >= v1.0.5. > > Matt > > On Mon, Jan 24, 2011 at 10:35 AM, Matt Benson <[email protected]> > wrote: > > I feel like we're going in circles, but I feel like the clouds may be > breaking since you've mentioned "as part of our Java EE 6 projects." Am I > to understand that this is the context in which "the TCK provided by Oracle" > manages to trump that provided by the spec lead? My next question is then > whether we have any recourse to seek an updated TCK from Oracle? > > > > Matt > > > > On Jan 23, 2011, at 1:00 PM, Donald Woods wrote: > > > >> Currently, 1.0.3.GA is the latest version we have from Oracle for the > >> ASF to use as part of our Java EE 6 projects. Until we get an updated > >> version, we need to maintain compliance with that level. We could > >> create a 1.0.x maintenance branch for the 1.0.3 TCK and then upgrade > >> trunk to >= 1.0.5. > >> > >> -Donald > >> > >> > >> On 1/14/11 4:39 PM, Mark Struberg wrote: > >>> imo we should always aim to pass the latest available (and known good) > TCK. > >>> > >>> Please note that there are often some known issues _inside_ some TCK > due to over-interpretation of the spec wording, differences between the spec > wording and the spec-published javadoc (which has higher prio), etc. > >>> > >>> So taking the latest available (and reporting any problems back to the > EG) is always a good thing imo. > >>> > >>> LieGrue, > >>> strub > >>> > >>> --- On Fri, 1/14/11, Matt Benson <[email protected]> wrote: > >>> > >>>> From: Matt Benson <[email protected]> > >>>> Subject: Re: svn commit: r1002445 - > /incubator/bval/trunk/bval-tck/pom.xml > >>>> To: [email protected] > >>>> Date: Friday, January 14, 2011, 9:12 PM > >>>> Resurrecting this thread: > >>>> While it may be possible, as David suggests, to > >>>> manage different TCK > >>>> versions with Maven profiles, the point will become moot > >>>> after the > >>>> release of the 1.0.5 version of the > >>>> TCK: due to > >>>> http://opensource.atlassian.com/projects/hibernate/browse/BVTCK-12 > >>>> a > >>>> JSR303 implementation will realistically be able to pass a > >>>> TCK < > >>>> v1.0.5 or >= 1.0.5, but not both. My personal > >>>> preference is to make > >>>> Apache Bean Validation conform to the spec and thus the > >>>> later version > >>>> of the TCK. Can we take a basic poll as to the > >>>> general preference of > >>>> the team? > >>>> > >>>> Matt > >>>> > >>>> On 10/4/10, Gerhard <[email protected]> > >>>> wrote: > >>>>> 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> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > > > > >
