> On Mar 23, 2021, at 1:43 AM, Jean-Louis Monteiro <[email protected]> 
> wrote:
> 
> Hi David,
> 
> I'm glad you moved on this. As I mentioned a little while ago, the current
> approach was not working.
> 
> I had a quick look into the PR even though I did not get a chance to check
> it out and try locally. Ideally we should publish some snapshots, it does
> not hurt. And then fire up a TCK build.

I updated our tomee-tck setup so it uses these snapshots, then went ahead and 
pushed some snapshots.

Two TCK runs are going now for the EE 9.1 TCK on JDK 8 and 11:

 - EE 9.1 on JDK8 https://tck.work/tomee/build?id=1616541975465
 - EE 9.1 on JDK8 https://tck.work/tomee/build?id=1616542933031

Results are still rolling in, but it looks good so far.

> I'm overall fine with the approach. Sounds like a good compromise to avoid
> big maintenance costs without blocking us too much on the Jakarta EE 9 and
> forward.
> We'll see over time if we can improve, but it looks like a good starting
> point.

Thanks for the feedback!

Question for you.  I'm now remembering I need to wire back up the 
`jakarta-direct.properties` file you added.  I temporarily removed it from the 
plugin configuration as we now have the plugin used 3 times.  Should be easy to 
make it a dependency so it's visible.  If we're luck we can even mark it 
provided and have it still work -- then it won't be in the actual wars, zips, 
tars.

Do you vaguely recall what tests/areas this fixed?


-David

Attachment: smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature

Reply via email to