On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 12:34 AM, Raymond Feng<[email protected]> wrote: > The purpose of this exercise is to make sure that Tuscany behaves as the > specification says under various situations.
Thats the same as what Simon said previously about "accurately reflects the content of the SCA specifications", I don't think that should be the purpose of this exercise. Not to say we shouldn't also continue to do that as well, but its a much bigger task and will take a lot more work, and if thats what we focus on it could be well in to next year before we can say we're passing the conformance tests. IMHO it would be good to work as a team to fix the otest that are failing first, but its Apache so we're all free to work on what we please so if others want to first look at the ones passing for the wrong reasons then would a reasonable compromise be to not "activate" any new Tuscany specific error validation to cause new tests to fail until the Tuscany problem is fixed? That way it wont scupper any attempt by some of us to get all the tests passing sooner. ...ant
