Hi Karan Thanks for this. Cool:-) I just opened this link. I am not sure about the confluence username and password as mentioned in the documentation. Do I need to register my self somewhere?
I was a few weeks ago ready to submit a patch but I was not sure how to do this... Typical beginner problems. And I was busy since then with my company work. Regards, Ralf ----Ursprüngliche Nachricht---- Von: karan.ma...@gmail.com Datum: 10.05.2013 17:37 An: <dev@tomee.apache. org> Betreff: Re: Good validation candidates: SubTask 39, 48 Ralf, Nice to see you are working on the validation. FYI, Once you ran the th validation tests, it would generate a report and post it on confluence, i think that part is now a bit broken as the generated page is not rendered properly. Here is the page which gets generated: https://cwiki.apache.org/OPENEJB/validation-keys-audit-report.html . This page should tell you which validation keys are not currently being tested and also the list of keys which have been tested with links to test cases which have coverage for those keys. The link provided in the following section of http://tomee.apache.org/dev/writing-validation-tests.html is broken. "The above command will create a complete test coverage report and post it to this location OPENEJB:Validation Keys Audit Report<openejb:validation-keys-audit-report. html> " PS: David is being very kind here, he wrote the validation framework and basic infrastructure to test it, I simply wrote a Testing framework around it and in that process asked him tons of questions and bounced ideas in the list. The dev team was very helpful in driving this framework. On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 11:30 AM, Vishwanath Krishnamurthi < tovishwan...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Ralf, > > If you hadn't already seen this- here's a good doc > http://tomee.apache.org/dev/writing-validation-tests.html > > -Vishwa > > On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 4:38 AM, David Blevins <david.blev...@gmail.com > >wrote: > > > Thank you so much. You can thank Karan Malhi for a good chunk of that. > > He did an amazing job creating a framework for testing the validations > and > > ensuring each message key is used properly and supports all three levels > we > > expect. > > > > I agree, it's some of the better code I've seen. > > > > > > -David > > > > On Mar 21, 2013, at 12:40 PM, ralf.battenf...@bluewin.ch wrote: > > > > > Hi David and all contributors. I stepped into the section of the > > validation implementation, tests and related source code. I never have > seen > > such a clear design. It is good understandible. > > > > > > I am impressed:-) > > > > > > Tx, Ralf > > > > > > > > > On 21.03.13 08:42 dsh wrote: > > > > > > Thanks for the reminder Mark. Usually if things go well on IRC, > somebody > > > tells you immediately that design change stuff etc. should be posted to > > the > > > ML rather than discussing it online on IRC. So there are actually two > > > safety ropes in regards to making sure everything is documented and > thus > > > transparent :) > > > > > > > > > Cheers > > > Daniel > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 8:27 AM, Mark Struberg <strub...@yahoo.de> > > wrote: > > > > > > > > >> but just to be clear: IRC is a really good way to quickly get > feedback. > > >> But all the important decision making process and communication needs > > to be > > >> on the ASF mailing lists. > > >> There is an old saying over here: "if it didn't happen on the mailing > > >> list, it didn't happen" :) > > >> > > >> The reason is that IRC is not logged (because of a few good legal > > reasons) > > >> and the information is only available to a very few people who were > > logged > > >> in to the IRC. > > >> > > >> LieGrue, > > >> strub > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> ----- Original Message ----- > > >>> From: dsh <strub...@yahoo.de> > > >>> To: strub...@yahoo.de > > >>> Cc: > > >>> Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2013 7: 05 AM > > >>> Subject: Re: IGood validation candidates: SubTask 39, 48 > > >>> > > >>> Hi Ralf, > > >>> > > >>> we are as well on freenode (IRC #openejb) just in case you prefer IRC > > >> over > > >>> email... > > >>> > > >>> Cheers > > >>> Daniel > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 10:37 PM, <strub...@yahoo.de> wrote: > > >>> > > >>>> Hi Daniel > > >>>> > > >>>> Thank you. Yes indeed, I meant David:-) Very kind that you replied. > > >>>> > > >>>> I can see many test cases for other validations tasks. These are > good > > >>>> starting points for me. Subtaks 48 is the one, I am considering to > > >> work on, > > >>>> after I understood the internals. I will ask you experts as soon as > > >> they > > >>>> arise. > > >>>> > > >>>> Tx, Ralf > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> On 20.03.13 20:32 dsh wrote: > > >>>> > > >>>> Hi Ralf, > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> thought I am going to answer this question, knowing that you > probably > > >> meant > > >>>> David instead of Daniel ;) > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> I'd say if you like take both if they are available. That's really > > >>> up to > > >>>> your personal working style and how you like to sort out things. > Don't > > >>>> forget to ask questions as soon as they arise! > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> Cheers > > >>>> Daniel > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 8:02 PM, strub...@yahoo.de < > > >>>> struberg@yahoo. de> wrote: > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>>> Hi Daniel > > >>>>> > > >>>>> Going though the list, I see the following validations as ideal > > >>>> candidates > > >>>>> for me:-) > > >>>>> 39: Validation: > > >>>>> @ConcurrencyManagement mistakenly used on non-Singleton > > >>>>> 48: Validation: Field annotated with more than one injection; > > >>>>> @EJB, @Resource, @PersistenceContext, @PersistenceUnit > > >>>>> > > >>>>> Shall I take one or both two and dig into the details? > > >>>>> > > >>>>> Ralf > > >>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>>> ----Ursprüngliche Nachricht---- > > >>>>> Von: strub...@yahoo.de > > >>>>> Datum: 20.03.2013 02:42 > > >>>>> An: <strub...@yahoo.de>, <ralf. > > >>>>> strub...@yahoo.de> > > >>>>> Betreff: Re: Hello all together > > >>>>> > > >>>>> Hello, Ralf! > > >>>>> > > >>>>> Welcome aboard. We love having new people, > > >>>>> especially ones that love OpenEJB :) > > >>>>> > > >>>>> Starting small is definitely the right approach. On project this > > >> large > > >>>>> that can > > >>>>> still be pretty big, but hopefully we can find you something that > > >>> fits. > > >>>>> One area I think is always a good place for > > >>>>> new help is the validation code: > > >>>>> > > >>>>> - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OPENEJB-453 > > >>>>> > > >>>>> There's always something to do there. Most of that code lives > > >>>>> here: > > >>>>> > > >>>>> - > > >>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OPENEJB-453 > > >>>>> > > >>>>> - > > >>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OPENEJB-453 > > >>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>>> That's probably not enough information to completely get started, > > >>> but > > >>>>> hopefully we can inch our way there. Do any of > > >>>>> those validations look interesting to you? > > >>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>>> -David > > >>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>>> On Mar 17, 2013, at 6:28 AM, strub...@yahoo.de wrote: > > >>>>> > > >>>>>> > > >>>>> Hi > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> I recently subscribed myself to the dev list. I would love to > > >>> help and > > >>>>> contribute, especially for the OpenEJB > > >>>>> part. > > >>>>>> I work as a Java EE developer mainly on the backend side:-) > > >>>>>> I am also contributing from time to time to the > > >>>>> Shrinkwrap > > >>>>>> Descriptor project. > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> I was looking at the OpenEJB JIRAs, probably the subtask JIRAs > > >>> maybe > > >>>>> candidates? > > >>>>> As you wrote for > > >>>>>> beginners, start small:-) If you have something to do, let me > > >>> know. > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> Cheers, > > >>>>>> Ralf > > >>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- Karan Singh Malhi twitter.com/KaranSinghMalhi
