Thanks for the Jenkins build. I was using the parametrized one Richard created but it's definitely easier with a dedicated build. I looked at both Jenkins and TCK, and it looks not too bad considering the amount of changes applied both to TomEE and third party libraries + dependencies management.
I'll keep working to bring the build as close as possible to a green state? -- Jean-Louis Monteiro http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro http://www.tomitribe.com On Thu, Feb 9, 2023 at 1:16 AM David Blevins <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > On Feb 8, 2023, at 2:53 PM, David Blevins <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > >> On Feb 8, 2023, at 1:16 PM, David Blevins <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> > >>> On Feb 6, 2023, at 7:39 AM, Jean-Louis Monteiro < > [email protected]> wrote: > >>> > >>> Jon did the merge into our Jakarta branch, so we can close the PR now > >> > >> I just saw that branch. The idea I had of not merging to main was so > we could first get test coverage established and then start doing small > changes, bit by bit, so we can avoid pushing a big set of changes that > result in a perpetually broken build. > >> > >> I don’t really see how we can ever merge #1005 and not have that exact > outcome. > >> > >> How do we see the changes in #1005 reaching main? If there are test > failures, who fixes them since each person's individual PR is now closed > and they consider their work done? How would we even know whose changes > broke what? > > > > I’ve created a Jenkins job for PR 1005 that’s a copy of our main job: > > > > - https://ci-builds.apache.org/job/Tomee/job/pr-1005/1/ > > This build is actually looking pretty great so far. > > > I’m going to also kick off a Jakarta EE 9.1 TCK run against that branch > to see if there are regressions. > > Started: > > - https://tck.work/tomee/build?id=1675901379257 > > Fingers crossed. > > > -David > >
