On Tue, Mar 16, 2010 at 5:32 PM, Luciano Resende <[email protected]> wrote: > On Tue, Mar 16, 2010 at 10:15 AM, ant elder <[email protected]> wrote: >> On Tue, Mar 16, 2010 at 4:20 PM, Luciano Resende <[email protected]> >> wrote: >>> On Tue, Mar 16, 2010 at 2:50 AM, Simon Laws <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>>> >>>> I don't have any insight yet but running the otest/newlayout version >>>> of the tests against the latest code does see the 900X tests passing. >>>> I know that's not hugely helpful but at least we just need to unpick >>>> what is missing from the "compliance-tests" configuration. >>>> >>>> Simon >>>> >>> >>> I had to make changes on the Tuscany Runtime Bridge in order to >>> properly identify runtime/execution errors. Do you need to publish new >>> artifacts from the otest/newLayout ? >>> >> >> Oh right ok i remember i did see those changes, i'll go try merging >> that to the trunk code too. >> >> ...ant >> > > Thanks... I didn't realize we had duplicated pieces of the code in > trunk, and though it was more about publishing binaries from otest. > I'm in the middle of lots of schema related changes, so your help > merging is appreciated. >
AFAICT these tests aren't working correctly yet and the otests are just passing because they only check for a ServiceRuntimeException and not checking for any message about what the test is testing, thats in both the otests and trunk. ...ant
