Here's an edited higlights list of mods to the oasis repo JCA tests between 23rd of June and today, so I guess we've probably never passed the newly added tests.
Kelvin. Adding JCA_11010 JCA_11011 JCA_11012 JCA11013 JCA_11017 Adding JCA_11009 Adding JCA_11014, JCA_11015, JCA_11016 Completion of JCA_7005, JCA_7006 testcases Initial versions of new testcases JCA_3013 and JCA_3014 Initial versions of new testcases JCA_3013 and JCA_3014 Adding testcase JCA_7005 Adding testcase JCA_7004 Adding testcase JCA_7003 Updating 9016 Updating 9015 Adding testcases JCA_9007 JCA_9008 JCA_9009 JCA_9010 JCA_9011 JCA_9012 JCA_9013 Adding testcases JCA_4008 JCA_7001 JCA_7002 JCA_9006 On Mon, Jul 19, 2010 at 6:58 PM, Brent Daniel <[email protected]> wrote: > On Mon, Jul 19, 2010 at 3:53 AM, ant elder <[email protected]> wrote: > >> I've fixed an incorrect error message in the JCI tests and that suite >> all passes ok for me now, and the WS suite is passing cleanly too. For >> the others I'm seeing lots of fails in JCA and Policy as have already >> been posted to this thread, and down to just 4 fails in Assembly, two >> look like policy things (8014 and 12006) and two are interface >> matching (12007 and 12008). I'll go look at the interface matching >> ones. >> > > Both ASM 8014 and 12006 are failing as a result of stricter policy checking. > > 8014 is looking for confidentiality.transport, but we don't have a > policy set that satisfies this intent, and none of our bindings > currently have this intent in their mayProvides or alwaysProvides > attributes. I'm not sure which, if any, of the tuscany bindings are > using a confidential transport today. I guess the local flavor of > binding.sca would provide this inherently, but I'm not sure about the > remote case. The test case seems a little strict since implementing a > concrete policy for confidentiality.transport isn't required. > > 12006 is failing because we haven't implemented the externalAttachment > element that was added in POLICY-93 [1] / ASSEMBLY-122 [2]. We'll need > to add that to the model and update the policy runtime to handle it. I > can take a look at this. > > [1] http://www.osoa.org/jira/browse/POLICY-93 > [2] http://www.osoa.org/jira/browse/ASSEMBLY-222 > > Brent >
