Yes Romain Manni-Bucau @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> | Blog <https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <https://github.com/rmannibucau> | LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Book <https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance>
Le mar. 18 déc. 2018 à 14:10, Bruno Baptista <[email protected]> a écrit : > Is this a know bug registered somewhere? > Bruno Baptista > https://twitter.com/brunobat_ > > > On 18/12/18 13:02, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote: > > No, to the wrong assumption in terms if CDI exception in terms of error > during the deployment. The TCK felt in an unspecified area but we applied > the same workaround we have for CDI tck for both potential exception in > 2.0.9. > Other workarounds, as the circuit breaker bug in the TCK, are in scope > tests so we are good. > > Romain Manni-Bucau > @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> | Blog > <https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog > <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github > <https://github.com/rmannibucau> | LinkedIn > <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Book > <https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance> > > > Le mar. 18 déc. 2018 à 13:56, Bruno Baptista <[email protected]> a > écrit : > >> Was it related to this fix? >> >> https://github.com/eclipse/microprofile-fault-tolerance/issues/323 >> >> Cheers >> Bruno Baptista >> https://twitter.com/brunobat_ >> >> >> On 18/12/18 12:53, Bruno Baptista wrote: >> >> Hi Romain, >> >> I have concerns about tweaking the test environment in order to pass the >> TCK: >> >> >> https://github.com/apache/geronimo-safeguard/blob/master/safeguard-impl/src/test/java/org/apache/safeguard/impl/tck/SafeguardTCKExtension.java#L80 >> >> Without that, we have these failures: >> >> [ERROR] Failures: >> [ERROR] >> CircuitBreakerTest>Arquillian.run:138->testCircuitInitialSuccessDefaultSuccessThreshold:292 >> serviceA should throw an Exception in testCircuitDefaultSuccessThreshold on >> iteration 5 >> [ERROR] >> CircuitBreakerTest>Arquillian.run:138->testCircuitLateSuccessDefaultSuccessThreshold:370 >> in serviceA no CircuitBreakerOpenException should be fired on iteration 1 >> [INFO] >> [ERROR] Tests run: 212, Failures: 2, Errors: 0, Skipped: 0 >> >> You mention that the TCK leaks, can you provide further details on the >> nature of the leak and how the TCK can be improved? I don't see a filed >> issue regarding this problem. >> >> Cheers >> Bruno Baptista >> https://twitter.com/brunobat_ >> >> >> On 18/12/18 09:42, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote: >> >> Hi guys, >> >> as mentionned here is the vote fore Geronimo Safeguard 1.2.0 >> >> The staging repo is: >> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-1 >> <https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-1073> >> 075 >> My keys is still available in http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo >> /KEYS >> Tag is on the main source repo and sources in the staging repo. >> >> This vote is open for 3 days as usual or untll it gets its 3 binding +1s. >> >> Romain Manni-Bucau >> @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> | Blog >> <https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog >> <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github >> <https://github.com/rmannibucau> | LinkedIn >> <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Book >> <https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance> >> >>
