Re: Dealing with compliance disagreements (was Re: [VOTE] Geronimo activation_2.0_spec 1.0.0)

[David Blevins]

> On May 24, 2022, at 6:14 PM, David Blevins  wrote:
> 
> You could have flags that enabled non-compliant behavior, but they would have 
> to be off by default and require user action to turn them on.

To be clear I could have used a better word than "flags."  You can have any 
means you like to enable non-compliant behavior such as annotations, alternate 
jars, etc.  Anything that must be done explicitly by a user to put themselves 
knowingly in a non-compliant state.


-David



smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature

Dealing with compliance disagreements (was Re: [VOTE] Geronimo activation_2.0_spec 1.0.0)

[David Blevins]

Just wanted to echo what Jean-Louis said and add some details.

During the 20 years of these specs living in the JCP, the license requirements 
stated that you must agree to ship your implementation with all defaults set to 
the compliant state.  You could have flags that enabled non-compliant behavior, 
but they would have to be off by default and require user action to turn them 
on.

If we encounter a situation where we don't pass a test, here are the valid 
outcomes:

 1.  We decide to change our default behavior so we can pass the test.
 We may chose to create a way to enable the previous behavior, but
 we do not work that way by default.

 2.  We decide we think our behavior is spec-compliant and the TCK is
 testing something not defined by or against the spec.  We file a
 TCK challenge.

 A. Our challenge is approved.  We can ignore that failure and
still claim compliance.
 
 B. Our challenge is rejected.

i.  We execute option #1 and ship a compliant implementation.

ii. We decide we don't care about compliance.  Our users may
disagree and may need to patch or fork.


-David



> On May 24, 2022, at 5:12 PM, Jean-Louis MONTEIRO  wrote:
> 
> I always find it better when we can keep backward compatibility for users.
> But this is a major version and I'm not a big fan of cheap system properties.
> 
> If we think it's not good, we should create a challenge to get it fixed in 
> the spec + TCK.
> Otherwise, I would keep it the way it is. If it breaks users and we want to 
> help them out, it's still time to add the system property or a better 
> configuration option and do a maintenance release.
> 
> I'd go lazy instead of eager considering it's a major version.
> Meanwhile, I'd create an issue on the TCK + Spec
> 
> 
> Le mar. 24 mai 2022 à 13:21, Zowalla, Richard 
>  a écrit :
> Romain mentioned the idea (via Slack) of introducing a (cheap) system
> property, which a user can specifiy to get back the old behaviour. 
> 
> If we want to follow the compatibility appraoch, we should add that
> flag as the spec / RI is really unclear.
> 
> 
> Am Dienstag, dem 24.05.2022 um 13:01 +0200 schrieb Romain Manni-Bucau:
> > I conclude the same thing thanks your pointers so back to the
> > question: do we want to maintain the compat for our user base, do we
> > want to align on the random spec behavior or do we don't care?
> > Indeed I'm always in first team, in particular there since it will be
> > deprecated so the least we touch the best it is but guess it is a 50-
> > 50 case in terms of actual points :s.
> > 
> > Romain Manni-Bucau
> > @rmannibucau |  Blog | Old Blog | Github | LinkedIn | Book
> > 
> > 
> > Le mar. 24 mai 2022 à 12:57, Zowalla, Richard <
> > richard.zowa...@hs-heilbronn.de> a écrit :
> > > The test in question is 
> > > https://github.com/eclipse-ee4j/jaf-tck/blob/2.0.1/tests/api/javasoft/sqe/tests/jakarta/activation/ActivationDataFlavor/normalizeMimeTypeParameter_Test.java
> > > 
> > > which expects the plain parameter value instead of
> > > "parameter=value" as
> > > a return value.
> > > 
> > > The JavaDoc is also not quite clear about it:
> > > 
> > > https://jakarta.ee/specifications/activation/2.0/apidocs/jakarta.activation/jakarta/activation/activationdataflavor#normalizeMimeTypeParameter(java.lang.String,java.lang.String)
> > > 
> > > with "This method is called for each parameter name/value pair and
> > > should return the normalized representation of the
> > > parameterValue.".
> > > 
> > > The spec document itself 
> > > https://jakarta.ee/specifications/activation/2.0/jakarta-activation-spec-2.0.html
> > >  doesn't mention anything about it.
> > > 
> > > Guess it is a relict from java.awt.DataFlavour (also @Deprecated
> > > there)
> > > to keep compatibility after removing the references to it.
> > > 
> > > Am Dienstag, dem 24.05.2022 um 12:42 +0200 schrieb Romain Manni-
> > > Bucau:
> > > > Hmm, before that the question is "are the TCK spec compliant", a
> > > lot
> > > > have a reference in the spec we maybe missed, do you have some
> > > > pointers on them? If we were wrong let's fix it, if the TCK are
> > > wrong
> > > > then maybe ignore the TCK?
> > > > 
> > > > Romain Manni-Bucau
> > > > @rmannibucau |  Blog | Old Blog | Github | LinkedIn | Book
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > Le mar. 24 mai 2022 à 12:33, Zowalla, Richard <
> > > > richard.zowa...@hs-heilbronn.de> a écrit :
> > > > > There is a TCK test regarding normalizeMimeTypeParameter which
> > > > > broke with the current impl of normalizeMimeTypeParameter 
> > > > > 
> > > > > Therefore, I adjusted it but agree that it is mit really
> > > specified.
> > > > > Question would be, if it is "ok" to fail specific tests of the
> > > TCK.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Gruß
> > > > > Richard
> > > > > Von: Romain Manni-Bucau 
> > > > > Gesendet: Dienstag, 24. Mai 2022 11:53:37
> > > > > An: dev@geronimo.apache.org
> > > > > Betreff: Re: [VOTE] Geronimo activation_2.0_spec 

Re: [VOTE] Geronimo activation_2.0_spec 1.0.0

[Jean-Louis MONTEIRO]

here is my own +1 (binding)

Le mer. 25 mai 2022 à 02:12, Jean-Louis MONTEIRO  a
écrit :

> I always find it better when we can keep backward compatibility for users.
> But this is a major version and I'm not a big fan of cheap system
> properties.
>
> If we think it's not good, we should create a challenge to get it fixed in
> the spec + TCK.
> Otherwise, I would keep it the way it is. If it breaks users and we want
> to help them out, it's still time to add the system property or a better
> configuration option and do a maintenance release.
>
> I'd go lazy instead of eager considering it's a major version.
> Meanwhile, I'd create an issue on the TCK + Spec
>
>
> Le mar. 24 mai 2022 à 13:21, Zowalla, Richard <
> richard.zowa...@hs-heilbronn.de> a écrit :
>
>> Romain mentioned the idea (via Slack) of introducing a (cheap) system
>> property, which a user can specifiy to get back the old behaviour.
>>
>> If we want to follow the compatibility appraoch, we should add that
>> flag as the spec / RI is really unclear.
>>
>>
>> Am Dienstag, dem 24.05.2022 um 13:01 +0200 schrieb Romain Manni-Bucau:
>> > I conclude the same thing thanks your pointers so back to the
>> > question: do we want to maintain the compat for our user base, do we
>> > want to align on the random spec behavior or do we don't care?
>> > Indeed I'm always in first team, in particular there since it will be
>> > deprecated so the least we touch the best it is but guess it is a 50-
>> > 50 case in terms of actual points :s.
>> >
>> > Romain Manni-Bucau
>> > @rmannibucau |  Blog | Old Blog | Github | LinkedIn | Book
>> >
>> >
>> > Le mar. 24 mai 2022 à 12:57, Zowalla, Richard <
>> > richard.zowa...@hs-heilbronn.de> a écrit :
>> > > The test in question is
>> > >
>> https://github.com/eclipse-ee4j/jaf-tck/blob/2.0.1/tests/api/javasoft/sqe/tests/jakarta/activation/ActivationDataFlavor/normalizeMimeTypeParameter_Test.java
>> > >
>> > > which expects the plain parameter value instead of
>> > > "parameter=value" as
>> > > a return value.
>> > >
>> > > The JavaDoc is also not quite clear about it:
>> > >
>> > >
>> https://jakarta.ee/specifications/activation/2.0/apidocs/jakarta.activation/jakarta/activation/activationdataflavor#normalizeMimeTypeParameter(java.lang.String,java.lang.String)
>> > >
>> > > with "This method is called for each parameter name/value pair and
>> > > should return the normalized representation of the
>> > > parameterValue.".
>> > >
>> > > The spec document itself
>> > >
>> https://jakarta.ee/specifications/activation/2.0/jakarta-activation-spec-2.0.html
>> > >  doesn't mention anything about it.
>> > >
>> > > Guess it is a relict from java.awt.DataFlavour (also @Deprecated
>> > > there)
>> > > to keep compatibility after removing the references to it.
>> > >
>> > > Am Dienstag, dem 24.05.2022 um 12:42 +0200 schrieb Romain Manni-
>> > > Bucau:
>> > > > Hmm, before that the question is "are the TCK spec compliant", a
>> > > lot
>> > > > have a reference in the spec we maybe missed, do you have some
>> > > > pointers on them? If we were wrong let's fix it, if the TCK are
>> > > wrong
>> > > > then maybe ignore the TCK?
>> > > >
>> > > > Romain Manni-Bucau
>> > > > @rmannibucau |  Blog | Old Blog | Github | LinkedIn | Book
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > Le mar. 24 mai 2022 à 12:33, Zowalla, Richard <
>> > > > richard.zowa...@hs-heilbronn.de> a écrit :
>> > > > > There is a TCK test regarding normalizeMimeTypeParameter which
>> > > > > broke with the current impl of normalizeMimeTypeParameter
>> > > > >
>> > > > > Therefore, I adjusted it but agree that it is mit really
>> > > specified.
>> > > > > Question would be, if it is "ok" to fail specific tests of the
>> > > TCK.
>> > > > >
>> > > > > Gruß
>> > > > > Richard
>> > > > > Von: Romain Manni-Bucau 
>> > > > > Gesendet: Dienstag, 24. Mai 2022 11:53:37
>> > > > > An: dev@geronimo.apache.org
>> > > > > Betreff: Re: [VOTE] Geronimo activation_2.0_spec 1.0.0
>> > > > >
>> > > > > Not voting negatively but seems we
>> > > > > broke normalizeMimeTypeParameter (I guess copying the RI?) and
>> > > I'm
>> > > > > not sure it should be done.
>> > > > > From my understanding this part is not well specified and
>> > > highly
>> > > > > depends on the impl but I don't see a reson to break existing
>> > > > > consumers which I always favor in regards of being aligned on
>> > > the
>> > > > > RI.
>> > > > >
>> > > > > Romain Manni-Bucau
>> > > > > @rmannibucau |  Blog | Old Blog | Github | LinkedIn | Book
>> > > > >
>> > > > >
>> > > > > Le mar. 24 mai 2022 à 11:45, Jean-Louis Monteiro <
>> > > > > jlmonte...@tomitribe.com> a écrit :
>> > > > > > Here we go
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > We now pass all TCK and signature tests. Thanks Richard.
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > This is essentially the same as the M1 David did last week
>> > > but
>> > > > > > with the fixes for compliance (See GERONIMO-6832)
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > Here is the link for sources
>> > > > > >
>> > > 

Re: [VOTE] Geronimo activation_2.0_spec 1.0.0

[Jean-Louis MONTEIRO]

I always find it better when we can keep backward compatibility for users.
But this is a major version and I'm not a big fan of cheap system
properties.

If we think it's not good, we should create a challenge to get it fixed in
the spec + TCK.
Otherwise, I would keep it the way it is. If it breaks users and we want to
help them out, it's still time to add the system property or a better
configuration option and do a maintenance release.

I'd go lazy instead of eager considering it's a major version.
Meanwhile, I'd create an issue on the TCK + Spec


Le mar. 24 mai 2022 à 13:21, Zowalla, Richard <
richard.zowa...@hs-heilbronn.de> a écrit :

> Romain mentioned the idea (via Slack) of introducing a (cheap) system
> property, which a user can specifiy to get back the old behaviour.
>
> If we want to follow the compatibility appraoch, we should add that
> flag as the spec / RI is really unclear.
>
>
> Am Dienstag, dem 24.05.2022 um 13:01 +0200 schrieb Romain Manni-Bucau:
> > I conclude the same thing thanks your pointers so back to the
> > question: do we want to maintain the compat for our user base, do we
> > want to align on the random spec behavior or do we don't care?
> > Indeed I'm always in first team, in particular there since it will be
> > deprecated so the least we touch the best it is but guess it is a 50-
> > 50 case in terms of actual points :s.
> >
> > Romain Manni-Bucau
> > @rmannibucau |  Blog | Old Blog | Github | LinkedIn | Book
> >
> >
> > Le mar. 24 mai 2022 à 12:57, Zowalla, Richard <
> > richard.zowa...@hs-heilbronn.de> a écrit :
> > > The test in question is
> > >
> https://github.com/eclipse-ee4j/jaf-tck/blob/2.0.1/tests/api/javasoft/sqe/tests/jakarta/activation/ActivationDataFlavor/normalizeMimeTypeParameter_Test.java
> > >
> > > which expects the plain parameter value instead of
> > > "parameter=value" as
> > > a return value.
> > >
> > > The JavaDoc is also not quite clear about it:
> > >
> > >
> https://jakarta.ee/specifications/activation/2.0/apidocs/jakarta.activation/jakarta/activation/activationdataflavor#normalizeMimeTypeParameter(java.lang.String,java.lang.String)
> > >
> > > with "This method is called for each parameter name/value pair and
> > > should return the normalized representation of the
> > > parameterValue.".
> > >
> > > The spec document itself
> > >
> https://jakarta.ee/specifications/activation/2.0/jakarta-activation-spec-2.0.html
> > >  doesn't mention anything about it.
> > >
> > > Guess it is a relict from java.awt.DataFlavour (also @Deprecated
> > > there)
> > > to keep compatibility after removing the references to it.
> > >
> > > Am Dienstag, dem 24.05.2022 um 12:42 +0200 schrieb Romain Manni-
> > > Bucau:
> > > > Hmm, before that the question is "are the TCK spec compliant", a
> > > lot
> > > > have a reference in the spec we maybe missed, do you have some
> > > > pointers on them? If we were wrong let's fix it, if the TCK are
> > > wrong
> > > > then maybe ignore the TCK?
> > > >
> > > > Romain Manni-Bucau
> > > > @rmannibucau |  Blog | Old Blog | Github | LinkedIn | Book
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Le mar. 24 mai 2022 à 12:33, Zowalla, Richard <
> > > > richard.zowa...@hs-heilbronn.de> a écrit :
> > > > > There is a TCK test regarding normalizeMimeTypeParameter which
> > > > > broke with the current impl of normalizeMimeTypeParameter
> > > > >
> > > > > Therefore, I adjusted it but agree that it is mit really
> > > specified.
> > > > > Question would be, if it is "ok" to fail specific tests of the
> > > TCK.
> > > > >
> > > > > Gruß
> > > > > Richard
> > > > > Von: Romain Manni-Bucau 
> > > > > Gesendet: Dienstag, 24. Mai 2022 11:53:37
> > > > > An: dev@geronimo.apache.org
> > > > > Betreff: Re: [VOTE] Geronimo activation_2.0_spec 1.0.0
> > > > >
> > > > > Not voting negatively but seems we
> > > > > broke normalizeMimeTypeParameter (I guess copying the RI?) and
> > > I'm
> > > > > not sure it should be done.
> > > > > From my understanding this part is not well specified and
> > > highly
> > > > > depends on the impl but I don't see a reson to break existing
> > > > > consumers which I always favor in regards of being aligned on
> > > the
> > > > > RI.
> > > > >
> > > > > Romain Manni-Bucau
> > > > > @rmannibucau |  Blog | Old Blog | Github | LinkedIn | Book
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Le mar. 24 mai 2022 à 11:45, Jean-Louis Monteiro <
> > > > > jlmonte...@tomitribe.com> a écrit :
> > > > > > Here we go
> > > > > >
> > > > > > We now pass all TCK and signature tests. Thanks Richard.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > This is essentially the same as the M1 David did last week
> > > but
> > > > > > with the fixes for compliance (See GERONIMO-6832)
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Here is the link for sources
> > > > > >
> > > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/geronimo/activation_2.0_spec/
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Here is the svn tag
> > > > > >
> > >
> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/specs/tags/geronimo-activation_2.0_spec-1.0.0/
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Here 

[jira] [Comment Edited] (GERONIMO-6835) Fix Jakarta Mail TCK 2.0.1 for Geronimo Jakarta Mail Impl

[Richard Zowalla (Jira)]

[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-6835?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=17541671#comment-17541671
 ] 

Richard Zowalla edited comment on GERONIMO-6835 at 5/24/22 7:43 PM:


Bootstraping the mailbox "test1" from the TCK fails for one (mail no. 9) of the 
mails: 
https://github.com/eclipse-ee4j/mail-tck/blob/2.0.0/tests/mailboxes/test1/9
 

This specific mail fails with


{code:java}
a5 APPEND test1 () "8-Dec-1996 15:30:12 +0100" {150432}
a5 BAD APPEND failed. Illegal arguments.
Unexpected command IMAP command error
org.apache.geronimo.mail.util.InvalidCommandException: Unexpected command IMAP 
command error
at 
org.apache.geronimo.mail.store.imap.connection.IMAPConnection.receiveResponse(IMAPConnection.java:412)
at 
org.apache.geronimo.mail.store.imap.connection.IMAPCommand.writeTo(IMAPCommand.java:200)
at 
org.apache.geronimo.mail.store.imap.connection.IMAPConnection.sendCommand(IMAPConnection.java:320)
at 
org.apache.geronimo.mail.store.imap.connection.IMAPConnection.sendSimpleCommand(IMAPConnection.java:288)
at 
org.apache.geronimo.mail.store.imap.connection.IMAPConnection.appendMessage(IMAPConnection.java:1455)
at 
org.apache.geronimo.mail.store.imap.IMAPFolder.appendMessage(IMAPFolder.java:1562)
at 
org.apache.geronimo.mail.store.imap.IMAPFolder.appendMessages(IMAPFolder.java:977)
at fpopulate.copyMessages(fpopulate.java:209)
at fpopulate.copy(fpopulate.java:136)
at fpopulate.main(fpopulate.java:107)
{code}

while it works for the reference impl:

{code:java}
A6 APPEND test1 () "08-Dec-1996 15:30:12 +0100" {153113+}
A6 OK [APPENDUID 466034631 1] APPEND completed.
  Copied 1 messages

{code}

Targeting the same mail server. Note the difference in the literal header. Most 
of the TCK tests fail with a similar exception.

* To reproduce follow the instructions in tck.adoc (docker-compose + starting 
test mail)
* Copy "fpopulate" to the geronimo project. 
* Add the message from above into a folder and call the file "1".
* Run "fpopulate" with arguments "-s  -d 
imap://user01%40james.local:1234@localhost:1143 -D"

The same procedere works for the RI, so there might be a difference somewhere.



was (Author: rzo1):
Bootstraping the mailbox "test1" from the TCK fails for one (mail no. 9) of the 
mails contained in there:

 
{code:java}
{code}
 

This specific mail fails with


{code:java}
a5 APPEND test1 () "8-Dec-1996 15:30:12 +0100" {150432}
a5 BAD APPEND failed. Illegal arguments.
Unexpected command IMAP command error
org.apache.geronimo.mail.util.InvalidCommandException: Unexpected command IMAP 
command error
at 
org.apache.geronimo.mail.store.imap.connection.IMAPConnection.receiveResponse(IMAPConnection.java:412)
at 
org.apache.geronimo.mail.store.imap.connection.IMAPCommand.writeTo(IMAPCommand.java:200)
at 
org.apache.geronimo.mail.store.imap.connection.IMAPConnection.sendCommand(IMAPConnection.java:320)
at 
org.apache.geronimo.mail.store.imap.connection.IMAPConnection.sendSimpleCommand(IMAPConnection.java:288)
at 
org.apache.geronimo.mail.store.imap.connection.IMAPConnection.appendMessage(IMAPConnection.java:1455)
at 
org.apache.geronimo.mail.store.imap.IMAPFolder.appendMessage(IMAPFolder.java:1562)
at 
org.apache.geronimo.mail.store.imap.IMAPFolder.appendMessages(IMAPFolder.java:977)
at fpopulate.copyMessages(fpopulate.java:209)
at fpopulate.copy(fpopulate.java:136)
at fpopulate.main(fpopulate.java:107)
{code}

while it works for the reference impl:

{code:java}
A6 APPEND test1 () "08-Dec-1996 15:30:12 +0100" {153113+}
A6 OK [APPENDUID 466034631 1] APPEND completed.
  Copied 1 messages

{code}

Targeting the same mail server. Note the difference in the literal header. Most 
of the TCK tests fail with a similar exception.

* To reproduce follow the instructions in tck.adoc (docker-compose + starting 
test mail)
* Copy "fpopulate" to the geronimo project. 
* Add the message from above into a folder and call the file "1".
* Run "fpopulate" with arguments "-s  -d 
imap://user01%40james.local:1234@localhost:1143 -D"

The same procedere works for the RI, so there might be a difference somewhere.


> Fix Jakarta Mail TCK 2.0.1 for Geronimo Jakarta Mail Impl
> -
>
> Key: GERONIMO-6835
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-6835
> Project: Geronimo
>  Issue Type: Improvement
>  Security Level: public(Regular issues) 
>  Components: mail
>Reporter: Richard Zowalla
>Priority: Major
>
> Currently, we have some failing TCK tests for our Jakarta Mail implementation 
> with https://jakarta.ee/specifications/mail/2.0/ (TCK 2.0.1).
> See attached output. Difference between 8 and 

[jira] [Comment Edited] (GERONIMO-6835) Fix Jakarta Mail TCK 2.0.1 for Geronimo Jakarta Mail Impl

[Richard Zowalla (Jira)]

[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-6835?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=17541671#comment-17541671
 ] 

Richard Zowalla edited comment on GERONIMO-6835 at 5/24/22 7:43 PM:


Bootstraping the mailbox "test1" from the TCK fails for one (mail no. 9) of the 
mails contained in there:

 
{code:java}
{code}
 

This specific mail fails with


{code:java}
a5 APPEND test1 () "8-Dec-1996 15:30:12 +0100" {150432}
a5 BAD APPEND failed. Illegal arguments.
Unexpected command IMAP command error
org.apache.geronimo.mail.util.InvalidCommandException: Unexpected command IMAP 
command error
at 
org.apache.geronimo.mail.store.imap.connection.IMAPConnection.receiveResponse(IMAPConnection.java:412)
at 
org.apache.geronimo.mail.store.imap.connection.IMAPCommand.writeTo(IMAPCommand.java:200)
at 
org.apache.geronimo.mail.store.imap.connection.IMAPConnection.sendCommand(IMAPConnection.java:320)
at 
org.apache.geronimo.mail.store.imap.connection.IMAPConnection.sendSimpleCommand(IMAPConnection.java:288)
at 
org.apache.geronimo.mail.store.imap.connection.IMAPConnection.appendMessage(IMAPConnection.java:1455)
at 
org.apache.geronimo.mail.store.imap.IMAPFolder.appendMessage(IMAPFolder.java:1562)
at 
org.apache.geronimo.mail.store.imap.IMAPFolder.appendMessages(IMAPFolder.java:977)
at fpopulate.copyMessages(fpopulate.java:209)
at fpopulate.copy(fpopulate.java:136)
at fpopulate.main(fpopulate.java:107)
{code}

while it works for the reference impl:

{code:java}
A6 APPEND test1 () "08-Dec-1996 15:30:12 +0100" {153113+}
A6 OK [APPENDUID 466034631 1] APPEND completed.
  Copied 1 messages

{code}

Targeting the same mail server. Note the difference in the literal header. Most 
of the TCK tests fail with a similar exception.

* To reproduce follow the instructions in tck.adoc (docker-compose + starting 
test mail)
* Copy "fpopulate" to the geronimo project. 
* Add the message from above into a folder and call the file "1".
* Run "fpopulate" with arguments "-s  -d 
imap://user01%40james.local:1234@localhost:1143 -D"

The same procedere works for the RI, so there might be a difference somewhere.



was (Author: rzo1):
Bootstraping the mailbox "test1" from the TCK fails for one of the mails 
contained in there:

 
{code:java}
>From jmk@cochin Thu Feb 12 14:06:35 1998 -0800
Return-Path: 
Received: from rita.eng.sun.com by shorter.eng.sun.com (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4)
   id RAA10322; Fri, 8 Aug 1997 17:23:07 -0700
Received: from jumanji.eng.sun.com by rita.eng.sun.com (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4)
   id RAA06403; Fri, 8 Aug 1997 17:23:03 -0700
Received: by jumanji.eng.sun.com (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4)
   id RAA22671; Fri, 8 Aug 1997 17:23:05 -0700
Date: Fri, 8 Aug 1997 17:23:05 -0700
From: ptn@jumanji (Phuong T. Nguyen)
Message-Id: <199708090023.raa22...@jumanji.eng.sun.com>
To: javamail@rita
Subject: Code Manager notification
Precedence: bulk
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Length: 682
Status: RO
X-Status: 
X-Keywords:
X-UID: 19

Event:putback-to
Parent workspace: /net/icdev/export1/ic/krakatoa/ws/jdt1.1-master
  (icdev:/export1/ic/krakatoa/ws/jdt1.1-master)
Child workspace:  /export0/ws/jdt1.1-ptn
  (jumanji:/export0/ws/jdt1.1-ptn)
User: ptn

Comment:
- Fixed bug 4064017
  HJV I18N: do not use System.getProperty("jdt.locale") to get Help
  locale dir

Files:
update: src/share/lib/textmessages.properties
update: src/share/lib/props/default/jdt.props
update: src/share/sunw/sunw/hotjava/sw/applets/HomePageApplet.java
update: src/share/sunw/sunw/hotjava/sw/misc/swBrowserProperties.java
update: src/share/sunw/sunw/hotjava/sw/ui/SwEditorFrame.java


{code}
 

This specific mail fails with


{code:java}
a5 APPEND test1 () "9-Aug-1997 02:23:05 +0200" {1399}
a5 BAD APPEND failed. Illegal arguments.
Unexpected command IMAP command error
org.apache.geronimo.mail.util.InvalidCommandException: Unexpected command IMAP 
command error
at 
org.apache.geronimo.mail.store.imap.connection.IMAPConnection.receiveResponse(IMAPConnection.java:412)
at 
org.apache.geronimo.mail.store.imap.connection.IMAPCommand.writeTo(IMAPCommand.java:200)
at 
org.apache.geronimo.mail.store.imap.connection.IMAPConnection.sendCommand(IMAPConnection.java:320)
at 
org.apache.geronimo.mail.store.imap.connection.IMAPConnection.sendSimpleCommand(IMAPConnection.java:288)
at 
org.apache.geronimo.mail.store.imap.connection.IMAPConnection.appendMessage(IMAPConnection.java:1455)
at 
org.apache.geronimo.mail.store.imap.IMAPFolder.appendMessage(IMAPFolder.java:1562)
at 
org.apache.geronimo.mail.store.imap.IMAPFolder.appendMessages(IMAPFolder.java:977)
at fpopulate.copyMessages(fpopulate.java:209)
at fpopulate.copy(fpopulate.java:136)
at 

[jira] [Comment Edited] (GERONIMO-6835) Fix Jakarta Mail TCK 2.0.1 for Geronimo Jakarta Mail Impl

[Richard Zowalla (Jira)]

[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-6835?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=17541671#comment-17541671
 ] 

Richard Zowalla edited comment on GERONIMO-6835 at 5/24/22 7:31 PM:


Bootstraping the mailbox "test1" from the TCK fails for one of the mails 
contained in there:

 
{code:java}
>From jmk@cochin Thu Feb 12 14:06:35 1998 -0800
Return-Path: 
Received: from rita.eng.sun.com by shorter.eng.sun.com (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4)
   id RAA10322; Fri, 8 Aug 1997 17:23:07 -0700
Received: from jumanji.eng.sun.com by rita.eng.sun.com (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4)
   id RAA06403; Fri, 8 Aug 1997 17:23:03 -0700
Received: by jumanji.eng.sun.com (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4)
   id RAA22671; Fri, 8 Aug 1997 17:23:05 -0700
Date: Fri, 8 Aug 1997 17:23:05 -0700
From: ptn@jumanji (Phuong T. Nguyen)
Message-Id: <199708090023.raa22...@jumanji.eng.sun.com>
To: javamail@rita
Subject: Code Manager notification
Precedence: bulk
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Length: 682
Status: RO
X-Status: 
X-Keywords:
X-UID: 19

Event:putback-to
Parent workspace: /net/icdev/export1/ic/krakatoa/ws/jdt1.1-master
  (icdev:/export1/ic/krakatoa/ws/jdt1.1-master)
Child workspace:  /export0/ws/jdt1.1-ptn
  (jumanji:/export0/ws/jdt1.1-ptn)
User: ptn

Comment:
- Fixed bug 4064017
  HJV I18N: do not use System.getProperty("jdt.locale") to get Help
  locale dir

Files:
update: src/share/lib/textmessages.properties
update: src/share/lib/props/default/jdt.props
update: src/share/sunw/sunw/hotjava/sw/applets/HomePageApplet.java
update: src/share/sunw/sunw/hotjava/sw/misc/swBrowserProperties.java
update: src/share/sunw/sunw/hotjava/sw/ui/SwEditorFrame.java


{code}
 

This specific mail fails with


{code:java}
a5 APPEND test1 () "9-Aug-1997 02:23:05 +0200" {1399}
a5 BAD APPEND failed. Illegal arguments.
Unexpected command IMAP command error
org.apache.geronimo.mail.util.InvalidCommandException: Unexpected command IMAP 
command error
at 
org.apache.geronimo.mail.store.imap.connection.IMAPConnection.receiveResponse(IMAPConnection.java:412)
at 
org.apache.geronimo.mail.store.imap.connection.IMAPCommand.writeTo(IMAPCommand.java:200)
at 
org.apache.geronimo.mail.store.imap.connection.IMAPConnection.sendCommand(IMAPConnection.java:320)
at 
org.apache.geronimo.mail.store.imap.connection.IMAPConnection.sendSimpleCommand(IMAPConnection.java:288)
at 
org.apache.geronimo.mail.store.imap.connection.IMAPConnection.appendMessage(IMAPConnection.java:1455)
at 
org.apache.geronimo.mail.store.imap.IMAPFolder.appendMessage(IMAPFolder.java:1562)
at 
org.apache.geronimo.mail.store.imap.IMAPFolder.appendMessages(IMAPFolder.java:977)
at fpopulate.copyMessages(fpopulate.java:209)
at fpopulate.copy(fpopulate.java:136)
at fpopulate.main(fpopulate.java:107)
{code}

while it works for the reference impl:

{code:java}
A6 APPEND test1 () "09-Aug-1997 02:23:05 +0200" {1418+}
Return-Path: 
Received: from rita.eng.sun.com by shorter.eng.sun.com (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4)
id RAA10322; Fri, 8 Aug 1997 17:23:07 -0700
Received: from jumanji.eng.sun.com by rita.eng.sun.com (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4)
id RAA06403; Fri, 8 Aug 1997 17:23:03 -0700
Received: by jumanji.eng.sun.com (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4)
id RAA22671; Fri, 8 Aug 1997 17:23:05 -0700
Date: Fri, 8 Aug 1997 17:23:05 -0700
From: ptn@jumanji (Phuong T. Nguyen)
Message-Id: <199708090023.raa22...@jumanji.eng.sun.com>
To: javamail@rita
Subject: Code Manager notification
Precedence: bulk
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Length: 682
Status: RO
X-Status: 
X-Keywords:
X-UID: 19

Event:putback-to
Parent workspace: /net/icdev/export1/ic/krakatoa/ws/jdt1.1-master
  (icdev:/export1/ic/krakatoa/ws/jdt1.1-master)
Child workspace:  /export0/ws/jdt1.1-ptn
  (jumanji:/export0/ws/jdt1.1-ptn)
User: ptn

Comment:
- Fixed bug 4064017
  HJV I18N: do not use System.getProperty("jdt.locale") to get Help
  locale dir

Files:
update: src/share/lib/textmessages.properties
update: src/share/lib/props/default/jdt.props
update: src/share/sunw/sunw/hotjava/sw/applets/HomePageApplet.java
update: src/share/sunw/sunw/hotjava/sw/misc/swBrowserProperties.java
update: src/share/sunw/sunw/hotjava/sw/ui/SwEditorFrame.java



A6 OK [APPENDUID 207446323 1] APPEND completed.

{code}

Targeting the same mail server. Note the difference in the literal header. Most 
of the TCK tests fail with a similar exception.

* To reproduce follow the instructions in tck.adoc (docker-compose + starting 
test mail)
* Copy "fpopulate" to the geronimo project. 
* Add the message from above into a folder and call the file "1".
* Run "fpopulate" with arguments "-s  -d 
imap://user01%40james.local:1234@localhost:1143 -D"

The same procedere 

[jira] [Comment Edited] (GERONIMO-6835) Fix Jakarta Mail TCK 2.0.1 for Geronimo Jakarta Mail Impl

[Richard Zowalla (Jira)]

[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-6835?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=17541671#comment-17541671
 ] 

Richard Zowalla edited comment on GERONIMO-6835 at 5/24/22 7:30 PM:


Bootstraping the mailbox "test1" from the TCK fails for one of the mails 
contained in there:

 
{code:java}
>From jmk@cochin Thu Feb 12 14:06:35 1998 -0800
Return-Path: 
Received: from rita.eng.sun.com by shorter.eng.sun.com (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4)
   id RAA10322; Fri, 8 Aug 1997 17:23:07 -0700
Received: from jumanji.eng.sun.com by rita.eng.sun.com (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4)
   id RAA06403; Fri, 8 Aug 1997 17:23:03 -0700
Received: by jumanji.eng.sun.com (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4)
   id RAA22671; Fri, 8 Aug 1997 17:23:05 -0700
Date: Fri, 8 Aug 1997 17:23:05 -0700
From: ptn@jumanji (Phuong T. Nguyen)
Message-Id: <199708090023.raa22...@jumanji.eng.sun.com>
To: javamail@rita
Subject: Code Manager notification
Precedence: bulk
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Length: 682
Status: RO
X-Status: 
X-Keywords:
X-UID: 19

Event:putback-to
Parent workspace: /net/icdev/export1/ic/krakatoa/ws/jdt1.1-master
  (icdev:/export1/ic/krakatoa/ws/jdt1.1-master)
Child workspace:  /export0/ws/jdt1.1-ptn
  (jumanji:/export0/ws/jdt1.1-ptn)
User: ptn

Comment:
- Fixed bug 4064017
  HJV I18N: do not use System.getProperty("jdt.locale") to get Help
  locale dir

Files:
update: src/share/lib/textmessages.properties
update: src/share/lib/props/default/jdt.props
update: src/share/sunw/sunw/hotjava/sw/applets/HomePageApplet.java
update: src/share/sunw/sunw/hotjava/sw/misc/swBrowserProperties.java
update: src/share/sunw/sunw/hotjava/sw/ui/SwEditorFrame.java


{code}
 

This specific mail fails with


{code:java}
a5 APPEND test1 () "9-Aug-1997 02:23:05 +0200" {1399}
a5 BAD APPEND failed. Illegal arguments.
Unexpected command IMAP command error
org.apache.geronimo.mail.util.InvalidCommandException: Unexpected command IMAP 
command error
at 
org.apache.geronimo.mail.store.imap.connection.IMAPConnection.receiveResponse(IMAPConnection.java:412)
at 
org.apache.geronimo.mail.store.imap.connection.IMAPCommand.writeTo(IMAPCommand.java:200)
at 
org.apache.geronimo.mail.store.imap.connection.IMAPConnection.sendCommand(IMAPConnection.java:320)
at 
org.apache.geronimo.mail.store.imap.connection.IMAPConnection.sendSimpleCommand(IMAPConnection.java:288)
at 
org.apache.geronimo.mail.store.imap.connection.IMAPConnection.appendMessage(IMAPConnection.java:1455)
at 
org.apache.geronimo.mail.store.imap.IMAPFolder.appendMessage(IMAPFolder.java:1562)
at 
org.apache.geronimo.mail.store.imap.IMAPFolder.appendMessages(IMAPFolder.java:977)
at fpopulate.copyMessages(fpopulate.java:209)
at fpopulate.copy(fpopulate.java:136)
at fpopulate.main(fpopulate.java:107)
{code}

while it works for the reference impl:

{code:java}
A6 APPEND test1 () "09-Aug-1997 02:23:05 +0200" {1418+}
Return-Path: 
Received: from rita.eng.sun.com by shorter.eng.sun.com (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4)
id RAA10322; Fri, 8 Aug 1997 17:23:07 -0700
Received: from jumanji.eng.sun.com by rita.eng.sun.com (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4)
id RAA06403; Fri, 8 Aug 1997 17:23:03 -0700
Received: by jumanji.eng.sun.com (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4)
id RAA22671; Fri, 8 Aug 1997 17:23:05 -0700
Date: Fri, 8 Aug 1997 17:23:05 -0700
From: ptn@jumanji (Phuong T. Nguyen)
Message-Id: <199708090023.raa22...@jumanji.eng.sun.com>
To: javam...@rita.de
Subject: Code Manager notification
Precedence: bulk
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Length: 682
Status: RO
X-Status: 
X-Keywords:
X-UID: 19

Event:putback-to
Parent workspace: /net/icdev/export1/ic/krakatoa/ws/jdt1.1-master
  (icdev:/export1/ic/krakatoa/ws/jdt1.1-master)
Child workspace:  /export0/ws/jdt1.1-ptn
  (jumanji:/export0/ws/jdt1.1-ptn)
User: ptn

Comment:
- Fixed bug 4064017
  HJV I18N: do not use System.getProperty("jdt.locale") to get Help
  locale dir

Files:
update: src/share/lib/textmessages.properties
update: src/share/lib/props/default/jdt.props
update: src/share/sunw/sunw/hotjava/sw/applets/HomePageApplet.java
update: src/share/sunw/sunw/hotjava/sw/misc/swBrowserProperties.java
update: src/share/sunw/sunw/hotjava/sw/ui/SwEditorFrame.java



A6 OK [APPENDUID 207446323 1] APPEND completed.

{code}

Targeting the same mail server. Note the difference in the literal header. Most 
of the TCK tests fail with a similar exception.

* To reproduce follow the instructions in tck.adoc (docker-compose + starting 
test mail)
* Copy "fpopulate" to the geronimo project. 
* Add the message from above into a folder and call the file "1".
* Run "fpopulate" with arguments "-s  -d 
imap://user01%40james.local:1234@localhost:1143 -D"

The same procedere 

[jira] [Comment Edited] (GERONIMO-6835) Fix Jakarta Mail TCK 2.0.1 for Geronimo Jakarta Mail Impl

[Richard Zowalla (Jira)]

[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-6835?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=17541671#comment-17541671
 ] 

Richard Zowalla edited comment on GERONIMO-6835 at 5/24/22 7:03 PM:


Bootstraping the mailbox "test1" from the TCK fails for one of the mails 
contained in there:

 
{code:java}
>From jmk@cochin Thu Feb 12 14:06:35 1998 -0800
Return-Path: 
Received: from rita.eng.sun.com by shorter.eng.sun.com (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4)
   id RAA10322; Fri, 8 Aug 1997 17:23:07 -0700
Received: from jumanji.eng.sun.com by rita.eng.sun.com (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4)
   id RAA06403; Fri, 8 Aug 1997 17:23:03 -0700
Received: by jumanji.eng.sun.com (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4)
   id RAA22671; Fri, 8 Aug 1997 17:23:05 -0700
Date: Fri, 8 Aug 1997 17:23:05 -0700
From: ptn@jumanji (Phuong T. Nguyen)
Message-Id: <199708090023.raa22...@jumanji.eng.sun.com>
To: javam...@rita.de
Subject: Code Manager notification
Precedence: bulk
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Length: 682
Status: RO
X-Status: 
X-Keywords:
X-UID: 19

Event:putback-to
Parent workspace: /net/icdev/export1/ic/krakatoa/ws/jdt1.1-master
  (icdev:/export1/ic/krakatoa/ws/jdt1.1-master)
Child workspace:  /export0/ws/jdt1.1-ptn
  (jumanji:/export0/ws/jdt1.1-ptn)
User: ptn

Comment:
- Fixed bug 4064017
  HJV I18N: do not use System.getProperty("jdt.locale") to get Help
  locale dir

Files:
update: src/share/lib/textmessages.properties
update: src/share/lib/props/default/jdt.props
update: src/share/sunw/sunw/hotjava/sw/applets/HomePageApplet.java
update: src/share/sunw/sunw/hotjava/sw/misc/swBrowserProperties.java
update: src/share/sunw/sunw/hotjava/sw/ui/SwEditorFrame.java


{code}
 

This specific mail fails with


{code:java}
a5 APPEND test1 () "9-Aug-1997 02:23:05 +0200" {1399}
a5 BAD APPEND failed. Illegal arguments.
Unexpected command IMAP command error
org.apache.geronimo.mail.util.InvalidCommandException: Unexpected command IMAP 
command error
at 
org.apache.geronimo.mail.store.imap.connection.IMAPConnection.receiveResponse(IMAPConnection.java:412)
at 
org.apache.geronimo.mail.store.imap.connection.IMAPCommand.writeTo(IMAPCommand.java:200)
at 
org.apache.geronimo.mail.store.imap.connection.IMAPConnection.sendCommand(IMAPConnection.java:320)
at 
org.apache.geronimo.mail.store.imap.connection.IMAPConnection.sendSimpleCommand(IMAPConnection.java:288)
at 
org.apache.geronimo.mail.store.imap.connection.IMAPConnection.appendMessage(IMAPConnection.java:1455)
at 
org.apache.geronimo.mail.store.imap.IMAPFolder.appendMessage(IMAPFolder.java:1562)
at 
org.apache.geronimo.mail.store.imap.IMAPFolder.appendMessages(IMAPFolder.java:977)
at fpopulate.copyMessages(fpopulate.java:209)
at fpopulate.copy(fpopulate.java:136)
at fpopulate.main(fpopulate.java:107)
{code}

while it works for the reference impl:

{code:java}
A6 APPEND test1 () "09-Aug-1997 02:23:05 +0200" {1418+}
Return-Path: 
Received: from rita.eng.sun.com by shorter.eng.sun.com (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4)
id RAA10322; Fri, 8 Aug 1997 17:23:07 -0700
Received: from jumanji.eng.sun.com by rita.eng.sun.com (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4)
id RAA06403; Fri, 8 Aug 1997 17:23:03 -0700
Received: by jumanji.eng.sun.com (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4)
id RAA22671; Fri, 8 Aug 1997 17:23:05 -0700
Date: Fri, 8 Aug 1997 17:23:05 -0700
From: ptn@jumanji (Phuong T. Nguyen)
Message-Id: <199708090023.raa22...@jumanji.eng.sun.com>
To: javam...@rita.de
Subject: Code Manager notification
Precedence: bulk
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Length: 682
Status: RO
X-Status: 
X-Keywords:
X-UID: 19

Event:putback-to
Parent workspace: /net/icdev/export1/ic/krakatoa/ws/jdt1.1-master
  (icdev:/export1/ic/krakatoa/ws/jdt1.1-master)
Child workspace:  /export0/ws/jdt1.1-ptn
  (jumanji:/export0/ws/jdt1.1-ptn)
User: ptn

Comment:
- Fixed bug 4064017
  HJV I18N: do not use System.getProperty("jdt.locale") to get Help
  locale dir

Files:
update: src/share/lib/textmessages.properties
update: src/share/lib/props/default/jdt.props
update: src/share/sunw/sunw/hotjava/sw/applets/HomePageApplet.java
update: src/share/sunw/sunw/hotjava/sw/misc/swBrowserProperties.java
update: src/share/sunw/sunw/hotjava/sw/ui/SwEditorFrame.java



A6 OK [APPENDUID 207446323 1] APPEND completed.

{code}

Targeting the same mail server. Note the difference in the literal header. Most 
of the TCK tests fail with a similar exception.

* To reproduce follow the instructions in tck.adoc (docker-compose + starting 
test mail)
* Copy "fpopulate" to the geronimo project. 
* Add the message from above into a folder and call the file "1".
* Run "fpopulate" with arguments "-s  -d 
imap://user01%40james.local:1234@localhost:1143 -D"

The same 

[jira] [Comment Edited] (GERONIMO-6835) Fix Jakarta Mail TCK 2.0.1 for Geronimo Jakarta Mail Impl

[Richard Zowalla (Jira)]

[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-6835?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=17541671#comment-17541671
 ] 

Richard Zowalla edited comment on GERONIMO-6835 at 5/24/22 7:02 PM:


Bootstraping the mailbox "test1" from the TCK fails for one of the mails 
contained in there:

 
{code:java}
>From jmk@cochin Thu Feb 12 14:06:35 1998 -0800
Return-Path: 
Received: from rita.eng.sun.com by shorter.eng.sun.com (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4)
   id RAA10322; Fri, 8 Aug 1997 17:23:07 -0700
Received: from jumanji.eng.sun.com by rita.eng.sun.com (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4)
   id RAA06403; Fri, 8 Aug 1997 17:23:03 -0700
Received: by jumanji.eng.sun.com (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4)
   id RAA22671; Fri, 8 Aug 1997 17:23:05 -0700
Date: Fri, 8 Aug 1997 17:23:05 -0700
From: ptn@jumanji (Phuong T. Nguyen)
Message-Id: <199708090023.raa22...@jumanji.eng.sun.com>
To: javam...@rita.de
Subject: Code Manager notification
Precedence: bulk
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Length: 682
Status: RO
X-Status: 
X-Keywords:
X-UID: 19

Event:putback-to
Parent workspace: /net/icdev/export1/ic/krakatoa/ws/jdt1.1-master
  (icdev:/export1/ic/krakatoa/ws/jdt1.1-master)
Child workspace:  /export0/ws/jdt1.1-ptn
  (jumanji:/export0/ws/jdt1.1-ptn)
User: ptn

Comment:
- Fixed bug 4064017
  HJV I18N: do not use System.getProperty("jdt.locale") to get Help
  locale dir

Files:
update: src/share/lib/textmessages.properties
update: src/share/lib/props/default/jdt.props
update: src/share/sunw/sunw/hotjava/sw/applets/HomePageApplet.java
update: src/share/sunw/sunw/hotjava/sw/misc/swBrowserProperties.java
update: src/share/sunw/sunw/hotjava/sw/ui/SwEditorFrame.java


{code}
 

This specific mail fails with


{code:java}
a5 APPEND test1 () "9-Aug-1997 02:23:05 +0200" {1399}
a5 BAD APPEND failed. Illegal arguments.
Unexpected command IMAP command error
org.apache.geronimo.mail.util.InvalidCommandException: Unexpected command IMAP 
command error
at 
org.apache.geronimo.mail.store.imap.connection.IMAPConnection.receiveResponse(IMAPConnection.java:412)
at 
org.apache.geronimo.mail.store.imap.connection.IMAPCommand.writeTo(IMAPCommand.java:200)
at 
org.apache.geronimo.mail.store.imap.connection.IMAPConnection.sendCommand(IMAPConnection.java:320)
at 
org.apache.geronimo.mail.store.imap.connection.IMAPConnection.sendSimpleCommand(IMAPConnection.java:288)
at 
org.apache.geronimo.mail.store.imap.connection.IMAPConnection.appendMessage(IMAPConnection.java:1455)
at 
org.apache.geronimo.mail.store.imap.IMAPFolder.appendMessage(IMAPFolder.java:1562)
at 
org.apache.geronimo.mail.store.imap.IMAPFolder.appendMessages(IMAPFolder.java:977)
at fpopulate.copyMessages(fpopulate.java:209)
at fpopulate.copy(fpopulate.java:136)
at fpopulate.main(fpopulate.java:107)
{code}

while it works for the reference impl:

{code:java}
A6 APPEND test1 () "09-Aug-1997 02:23:05 +0200" {1418+}
Return-Path: 
Received: from rita.eng.sun.com by shorter.eng.sun.com (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4)
id RAA10322; Fri, 8 Aug 1997 17:23:07 -0700
Received: from jumanji.eng.sun.com by rita.eng.sun.com (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4)
id RAA06403; Fri, 8 Aug 1997 17:23:03 -0700
Received: by jumanji.eng.sun.com (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4)
id RAA22671; Fri, 8 Aug 1997 17:23:05 -0700
Date: Fri, 8 Aug 1997 17:23:05 -0700
From: ptn@jumanji (Phuong T. Nguyen)
Message-Id: <199708090023.raa22...@jumanji.eng.sun.com>
To: javam...@rita.de
Subject: Code Manager notification
Precedence: bulk
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Length: 682
Status: RO
X-Status: 
X-Keywords:
X-UID: 19

Event:putback-to
Parent workspace: /net/icdev/export1/ic/krakatoa/ws/jdt1.1-master
  (icdev:/export1/ic/krakatoa/ws/jdt1.1-master)
Child workspace:  /export0/ws/jdt1.1-ptn
  (jumanji:/export0/ws/jdt1.1-ptn)
User: ptn

Comment:
- Fixed bug 4064017
  HJV I18N: do not use System.getProperty("jdt.locale") to get Help
  locale dir

Files:
update: src/share/lib/textmessages.properties
update: src/share/lib/props/default/jdt.props
update: src/share/sunw/sunw/hotjava/sw/applets/HomePageApplet.java
update: src/share/sunw/sunw/hotjava/sw/misc/swBrowserProperties.java
update: src/share/sunw/sunw/hotjava/sw/ui/SwEditorFrame.java



A6 OK [APPENDUID 207446323 1] APPEND completed.

{code}

Targeting the same mail server. Note the difference in the literal header. Most 
of the TCK tests fail with a similar exception.

* To reproduce follow the instructions in tck.adoc (docker-compose + starting 
test mail)
* Copy "fpopulate" to the geronimo project. 
* Add the message from above into a folder 
* Run "fpopulate" with arguments "-s  -d 
imap://user01%40james.local:1234@localhost:1143 -D"




was (Author: rzo1):
Bootstraping the 

[jira] [Commented] (GERONIMO-6835) Fix Jakarta Mail TCK 2.0.1 for Geronimo Jakarta Mail Impl

[Richard Zowalla (Jira)]

[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-6835?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=17541671#comment-17541671
 ] 

Richard Zowalla commented on GERONIMO-6835:
---

Bootstraping the mailbox "test1" from the TCK fails for one of the mails 
contained in there:

 
{code:java}
>From jmk@cochin Thu Feb 12 14:06:35 1998 -0800
Return-Path: 
Received: from rita.eng.sun.com by shorter.eng.sun.com (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4)
   id RAA10322; Fri, 8 Aug 1997 17:23:07 -0700
Received: from jumanji.eng.sun.com by rita.eng.sun.com (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4)
   id RAA06403; Fri, 8 Aug 1997 17:23:03 -0700
Received: by jumanji.eng.sun.com (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4)
   id RAA22671; Fri, 8 Aug 1997 17:23:05 -0700
Date: Fri, 8 Aug 1997 17:23:05 -0700
From: ptn@jumanji (Phuong T. Nguyen)
Message-Id: <199708090023.raa22...@jumanji.eng.sun.com>
To: javam...@rita.de
Subject: Code Manager notification
Precedence: bulk
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Length: 682
Status: RO
X-Status: 
X-Keywords:
X-UID: 19

Event:putback-to
Parent workspace: /net/icdev/export1/ic/krakatoa/ws/jdt1.1-master
  (icdev:/export1/ic/krakatoa/ws/jdt1.1-master)
Child workspace:  /export0/ws/jdt1.1-ptn
  (jumanji:/export0/ws/jdt1.1-ptn)
User: ptn

Comment:
- Fixed bug 4064017
  HJV I18N: do not use System.getProperty("jdt.locale") to get Help
  locale dir

Files:
update: src/share/lib/textmessages.properties
update: src/share/lib/props/default/jdt.props
update: src/share/sunw/sunw/hotjava/sw/applets/HomePageApplet.java
update: src/share/sunw/sunw/hotjava/sw/misc/swBrowserProperties.java
update: src/share/sunw/sunw/hotjava/sw/ui/SwEditorFrame.java


{code}
 

This specific mail fails with


{code:java}
a5 APPEND test1 () "9-Aug-1997 02:23:05 +0200" {1399}
a5 BAD APPEND failed. Illegal arguments.
Unexpected command IMAP command error
org.apache.geronimo.mail.util.InvalidCommandException: Unexpected command IMAP 
command error
at 
org.apache.geronimo.mail.store.imap.connection.IMAPConnection.receiveResponse(IMAPConnection.java:412)
at 
org.apache.geronimo.mail.store.imap.connection.IMAPCommand.writeTo(IMAPCommand.java:200)
at 
org.apache.geronimo.mail.store.imap.connection.IMAPConnection.sendCommand(IMAPConnection.java:320)
at 
org.apache.geronimo.mail.store.imap.connection.IMAPConnection.sendSimpleCommand(IMAPConnection.java:288)
at 
org.apache.geronimo.mail.store.imap.connection.IMAPConnection.appendMessage(IMAPConnection.java:1455)
at 
org.apache.geronimo.mail.store.imap.IMAPFolder.appendMessage(IMAPFolder.java:1562)
at 
org.apache.geronimo.mail.store.imap.IMAPFolder.appendMessages(IMAPFolder.java:977)
at fpopulate.copyMessages(fpopulate.java:209)
at fpopulate.copy(fpopulate.java:136)
at fpopulate.main(fpopulate.java:107)
{code}

while it works for the reference impl:

{code:java}
A6 APPEND test1 () "09-Aug-1997 02:23:05 +0200" {1418+}
Return-Path: 
Received: from rita.eng.sun.com by shorter.eng.sun.com (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4)
id RAA10322; Fri, 8 Aug 1997 17:23:07 -0700
Received: from jumanji.eng.sun.com by rita.eng.sun.com (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4)
id RAA06403; Fri, 8 Aug 1997 17:23:03 -0700
Received: by jumanji.eng.sun.com (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4)
id RAA22671; Fri, 8 Aug 1997 17:23:05 -0700
Date: Fri, 8 Aug 1997 17:23:05 -0700
From: ptn@jumanji (Phuong T. Nguyen)
Message-Id: <199708090023.raa22...@jumanji.eng.sun.com>
To: javam...@rita.de
Subject: Code Manager notification
Precedence: bulk
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Length: 682
Status: RO
X-Status: 
X-Keywords:
X-UID: 19

Event:putback-to
Parent workspace: /net/icdev/export1/ic/krakatoa/ws/jdt1.1-master
  (icdev:/export1/ic/krakatoa/ws/jdt1.1-master)
Child workspace:  /export0/ws/jdt1.1-ptn
  (jumanji:/export0/ws/jdt1.1-ptn)
User: ptn

Comment:
- Fixed bug 4064017
  HJV I18N: do not use System.getProperty("jdt.locale") to get Help
  locale dir

Files:
update: src/share/lib/textmessages.properties
update: src/share/lib/props/default/jdt.props
update: src/share/sunw/sunw/hotjava/sw/applets/HomePageApplet.java
update: src/share/sunw/sunw/hotjava/sw/misc/swBrowserProperties.java
update: src/share/sunw/sunw/hotjava/sw/ui/SwEditorFrame.java



A6 OK [APPENDUID 207446323 1] APPEND completed.

{code}

Targeting the same mail server. Note the difference in the literal header. Most 
of the TCK tests fail with a similar exception.

> Fix Jakarta Mail TCK 2.0.1 for Geronimo Jakarta Mail Impl
> -
>
> Key: GERONIMO-6835
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-6835
> Project: Geronimo
>  Issue Type: Improvement
>  Security Level: public(Regular issues) 
>  

[jira] [Commented] (GERONIMO-6835) Fix Jakarta Mail TCK 2.0.1 for Geronimo Jakarta Mail Impl

[Richard Zowalla (Jira)]

[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-6835?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=17541482#comment-17541482
 ] 

Richard Zowalla commented on GERONIMO-6835:
---

Note, that we are already passing the  
[com.sun.ts.tests.javamail.ee|http://com.sun.ts.tests.javamail.ee/] in TomEE 
with the current snapshot impl. This issue relates to the standalone mail tck. 

> Fix Jakarta Mail TCK 2.0.1 for Geronimo Jakarta Mail Impl
> -
>
> Key: GERONIMO-6835
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-6835
> Project: Geronimo
>  Issue Type: Improvement
>  Security Level: public(Regular issues) 
>  Components: mail
>Reporter: Richard Zowalla
>Priority: Major
>
> Currently, we have some failing TCK tests for our Jakarta Mail implementation 
> with https://jakarta.ee/specifications/mail/2.0/ (TCK 2.0.1).
> See attached output. Difference between 8 and 11 are the sigtests.
> Java 8
> {code:java}
> [javatest.batch] Completed running 321 tests.
> [javatest.batch] Number of Tests Passed  = 166
> [javatest.batch] Number of Tests Failed  = 155
> [javatest.batch] Number of Tests with Errors = 0
> [javatest.batch] Number of Tests Not Run = 0
> [javatest.batch] 
> ---
> [javatest.batch] 
> FAILEDjavasoft/sqe/tests/jakarta/mail/Address/equals_Test.java#equals_Test
> [javatest.batch] 
> FAILEDjavasoft/sqe/tests/jakarta/mail/Address/getType_Test.java#getType_Test
> [javatest.batch] 
> FAILEDjavasoft/sqe/tests/jakarta/mail/Address/toString_Test.java#toString_Test
> [javatest.batch] 
> PASSEDjavasoft/sqe/tests/jakarta/mail/event/ConnectionEvent/addConnectionListener_Test.java#addConnectionListener_Test
> [javatest.batch] 
> FAILEDjavasoft/sqe/tests/jakarta/mail/event/FolderEvent/addFolderListener_Test.java#addFolderListener_Test
> [javatest.batch] 
> FAILEDjavasoft/sqe/tests/jakarta/mail/event/FolderEvent/addMsgChangeList_Test.java#addMsgChangeList_Test
> [javatest.batch] 
> FAILEDjavasoft/sqe/tests/jakarta/mail/event/FolderEvent/addMsgCntList_Test.java#addMsgCntList_Test
> [javatest.batch] 
> FAILEDjavasoft/sqe/tests/jakarta/mail/event/StoreEvent/addStoreListener_Test.java#addStoreListener_Test
> [javatest.batch] 
> PASSEDjavasoft/sqe/tests/jakarta/mail/event/TransportEvent/addTransportListener_Test.java#addTransportListener_Test
> [javatest.batch] 
> PASSEDjavasoft/sqe/tests/jakarta/mail/exception/authenFailExp_Test.java#authenFailExp_Test
> [javatest.batch] 
> PASSEDjavasoft/sqe/tests/jakarta/mail/exception/folderClosedException_Test.java#folderClosedException_Test
> [javatest.batch] 
> FAILEDjavasoft/sqe/tests/jakarta/mail/exception/folderNotFoundExp_Test.java#folderNotFoundExp_Test
> [javatest.batch] 
> FAILEDjavasoft/sqe/tests/jakarta/mail/exception/illegalWriteException_Test.java#illegalWriteException_Test
> [javatest.batch] 
> FAILEDjavasoft/sqe/tests/jakarta/mail/exception/msgRemoveExp_Test.java#msgRemoveExp_Test
> [javatest.batch] 
> PASSEDjavasoft/sqe/tests/jakarta/mail/exception/noSuchProvExp_Test.java#noSuchProvExp_Test
> [javatest.batch] 
> FAILEDjavasoft/sqe/tests/jakarta/mail/FetchProfile/add_Test.java#add_Test
> [javatest.batch] 
> FAILEDjavasoft/sqe/tests/jakarta/mail/FetchProfile/contains_Test.java#contains_Test
> [javatest.batch] 
> PASSEDjavasoft/sqe/tests/jakarta/mail/FetchProfile/fetchProfile_Test.java#fetchProfile_Test
> [javatest.batch] 
> PASSEDjavasoft/sqe/tests/jakarta/mail/FetchProfile/getHeaderNames_Test.java#getHeaderNames_Test
> [javatest.batch] 
> PASSEDjavasoft/sqe/tests/jakarta/mail/FetchProfile/getItems_Test.java#getItems_Test
> [javatest.batch] 
> PASSEDjavasoft/sqe/tests/jakarta/mail/Flags/add_Test.java#add_Test
> [javatest.batch] 
> PASSEDjavasoft/sqe/tests/jakarta/mail/Flags/clear_Test.java#clear_Test
> [javatest.batch] 
> FAILEDjavasoft/sqe/tests/jakarta/mail/Flags/clone_Test.java#clone_Test
> [javatest.batch] 
> PASSEDjavasoft/sqe/tests/jakarta/mail/Flags/contains_Test.java#contains_Test
> [javatest.batch] 
> FAILEDjavasoft/sqe/tests/jakarta/mail/Flags/equals_Test.java#equals_Test
> [javatest.batch] 
> PASSEDjavasoft/sqe/tests/jakarta/mail/Flags/Flags_Test.java#Flags_Test
> [javatest.batch] 
> FAILEDjavasoft/sqe/tests/jakarta/mail/Flags/getSystemFlags_Test.java#getSystemFlags_Test
> [javatest.batch] 
> FAILEDjavasoft/sqe/tests/jakarta/mail/Flags/getUserFlags_Test.java#getUserFlags_Test
> [javatest.batch] 
> PASSEDjavasoft/sqe/tests/jakarta/mail/Flags/remove_Test.java#remove_Test
> [javatest.batch] 
> 

[jira] [Created] (GERONIMO-6835) Fix Jakarta Mail TCK 2.0.1 for Geronimo Jakarta Mail Impl

[Richard Zowalla (Jira)]

Richard Zowalla created GERONIMO-6835:
-

 Summary: Fix Jakarta Mail TCK 2.0.1 for Geronimo Jakarta Mail Impl
 Key: GERONIMO-6835
 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-6835
 Project: Geronimo
  Issue Type: Improvement
  Security Level: public (Regular issues)
  Components: mail
Reporter: Richard Zowalla


Currently, we have some failing TCK tests for our Jakarta Mail implementation 
with https://jakarta.ee/specifications/mail/2.0/ (TCK 2.0.1).

See attached output. Difference between 8 and 11 are the sigtests.

Java 8


{code:java}
[javatest.batch] Completed running 321 tests.
[javatest.batch] Number of Tests Passed  = 166
[javatest.batch] Number of Tests Failed  = 155
[javatest.batch] Number of Tests with Errors = 0
[javatest.batch] Number of Tests Not Run = 0
[javatest.batch] ---
[javatest.batch] 
FAILEDjavasoft/sqe/tests/jakarta/mail/Address/equals_Test.java#equals_Test
[javatest.batch] 
FAILEDjavasoft/sqe/tests/jakarta/mail/Address/getType_Test.java#getType_Test
[javatest.batch] 
FAILEDjavasoft/sqe/tests/jakarta/mail/Address/toString_Test.java#toString_Test
[javatest.batch] 
PASSEDjavasoft/sqe/tests/jakarta/mail/event/ConnectionEvent/addConnectionListener_Test.java#addConnectionListener_Test
[javatest.batch] 
FAILEDjavasoft/sqe/tests/jakarta/mail/event/FolderEvent/addFolderListener_Test.java#addFolderListener_Test
[javatest.batch] 
FAILEDjavasoft/sqe/tests/jakarta/mail/event/FolderEvent/addMsgChangeList_Test.java#addMsgChangeList_Test
[javatest.batch] 
FAILEDjavasoft/sqe/tests/jakarta/mail/event/FolderEvent/addMsgCntList_Test.java#addMsgCntList_Test
[javatest.batch] 
FAILEDjavasoft/sqe/tests/jakarta/mail/event/StoreEvent/addStoreListener_Test.java#addStoreListener_Test
[javatest.batch] 
PASSEDjavasoft/sqe/tests/jakarta/mail/event/TransportEvent/addTransportListener_Test.java#addTransportListener_Test
[javatest.batch] 
PASSEDjavasoft/sqe/tests/jakarta/mail/exception/authenFailExp_Test.java#authenFailExp_Test
[javatest.batch] 
PASSEDjavasoft/sqe/tests/jakarta/mail/exception/folderClosedException_Test.java#folderClosedException_Test
[javatest.batch] 
FAILEDjavasoft/sqe/tests/jakarta/mail/exception/folderNotFoundExp_Test.java#folderNotFoundExp_Test
[javatest.batch] 
FAILEDjavasoft/sqe/tests/jakarta/mail/exception/illegalWriteException_Test.java#illegalWriteException_Test
[javatest.batch] 
FAILEDjavasoft/sqe/tests/jakarta/mail/exception/msgRemoveExp_Test.java#msgRemoveExp_Test
[javatest.batch] 
PASSEDjavasoft/sqe/tests/jakarta/mail/exception/noSuchProvExp_Test.java#noSuchProvExp_Test
[javatest.batch] 
FAILEDjavasoft/sqe/tests/jakarta/mail/FetchProfile/add_Test.java#add_Test
[javatest.batch] 
FAILEDjavasoft/sqe/tests/jakarta/mail/FetchProfile/contains_Test.java#contains_Test
[javatest.batch] 
PASSEDjavasoft/sqe/tests/jakarta/mail/FetchProfile/fetchProfile_Test.java#fetchProfile_Test
[javatest.batch] 
PASSEDjavasoft/sqe/tests/jakarta/mail/FetchProfile/getHeaderNames_Test.java#getHeaderNames_Test
[javatest.batch] 
PASSEDjavasoft/sqe/tests/jakarta/mail/FetchProfile/getItems_Test.java#getItems_Test
[javatest.batch] 
PASSEDjavasoft/sqe/tests/jakarta/mail/Flags/add_Test.java#add_Test
[javatest.batch] 
PASSEDjavasoft/sqe/tests/jakarta/mail/Flags/clear_Test.java#clear_Test
[javatest.batch] 
FAILEDjavasoft/sqe/tests/jakarta/mail/Flags/clone_Test.java#clone_Test
[javatest.batch] 
PASSEDjavasoft/sqe/tests/jakarta/mail/Flags/contains_Test.java#contains_Test
[javatest.batch] 
FAILEDjavasoft/sqe/tests/jakarta/mail/Flags/equals_Test.java#equals_Test
[javatest.batch] 
PASSEDjavasoft/sqe/tests/jakarta/mail/Flags/Flags_Test.java#Flags_Test
[javatest.batch] 
FAILEDjavasoft/sqe/tests/jakarta/mail/Flags/getSystemFlags_Test.java#getSystemFlags_Test
[javatest.batch] 
FAILEDjavasoft/sqe/tests/jakarta/mail/Flags/getUserFlags_Test.java#getUserFlags_Test
[javatest.batch] 
PASSEDjavasoft/sqe/tests/jakarta/mail/Flags/remove_Test.java#remove_Test
[javatest.batch] 
FAILEDjavasoft/sqe/tests/jakarta/mail/Flags/retainAll_Test.java#retainAll_Test
[javatest.batch] 
FAILEDjavasoft/sqe/tests/jakarta/mail/Folder/appendMessages_Test.java#appendMessages_Test
[javatest.batch] 
FAILEDjavasoft/sqe/tests/jakarta/mail/Folder/autoclose_Test.java#autoclose_Test
[javatest.batch] 
FAILEDjavasoft/sqe/tests/jakarta/mail/Folder/close_Test.java#close_Test
[javatest.batch] 
FAILEDjavasoft/sqe/tests/jakarta/mail/Folder/create_Test.java#create_Test
[javatest.batch] 
FAILEDjavasoft/sqe/tests/jakarta/mail/Folder/delete_Test.java#delete_Test
[javatest.batch] 

[jira] [Commented] (GERONIMO-6834) geronimo-jakartamail_2.1_spec (1.0.0-M1) does not pass Jakarta Mail TCK SigTests for Java 11

[Richard Zowalla (Jira)]

[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-6834?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=17541470#comment-17541470
 ] 

Richard Zowalla commented on GERONIMO-6834:
---

The difference arises from the fact, that we are overriding Object#finalize() 
to do some work in our spec. SigTests run with 11+ expect a @Deprecated 
annotation to be present, which is only available in Java 9+. If we want to 
comply with that, we will need to switch the target to 11 (or stick with 1.8 
atm until EE10 is around the corner).

> geronimo-jakartamail_2.1_spec (1.0.0-M1) does not pass Jakarta Mail TCK 
> SigTests for Java 11
> 
>
> Key: GERONIMO-6834
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-6834
> Project: Geronimo
>  Issue Type: Bug
>  Security Level: public(Regular issues) 
>  Components: specs
>Reporter: Richard Zowalla
>Priority: Major
>
> We have failing signature tests on *geronimo-jakartamail_2.1_spec* (1.0.0-M1)
> {code:java}
> Missing Methods
> ---
> jakarta.mail.util.SharedByteArrayInputStream:   method public 
> byte[] java.io.ByteArrayInputStream.readAllBytes()
> jakarta.mail.util.SharedByteArrayInputStream:   method public 
> byte[] java.io.InputStream.readNBytes(int) throws java.io.IOException
> jakarta.mail.util.SharedByteArrayInputStream:   method public int 
> java.io.ByteArrayInputStream.readNBytes(byte[],int,int)
> jakarta.mail.util.SharedByteArrayInputStream:   method public 
> long java.io.ByteArrayInputStream.transferTo(java.io.OutputStream) throws 
> java.io.IOException
> jakarta.mail.util.SharedByteArrayInputStream:   method public 
> static java.io.InputStream java.io.InputStream.nullInputStream()
> jakarta.mail.util.SharedFileInputStream:method public byte[] 
> java.io.InputStream.readAllBytes() throws java.io.IOException
> jakarta.mail.util.SharedFileInputStream:method public byte[] 
> java.io.InputStream.readNBytes(int) throws java.io.IOException
> jakarta.mail.util.SharedFileInputStream:method public int 
> java.io.InputStream.readNBytes(byte[],int,int) throws java.io.IOException
> jakarta.mail.util.SharedFileInputStream:method public long 
> java.io.InputStream.transferTo(java.io.OutputStream) throws 
> java.io.IOException
> jakarta.mail.util.SharedFileInputStream:method public static 
> java.io.InputStream java.io.InputStream.nullInputStream()
> Missed Annotations
> --
> jakarta.mail.Address:   finalize():anno 0 
> java.lang.Deprecated(boolean forRemoval=false, java.lang.String since="9")
> jakarta.mail.Authenticator: finalize():anno 0 
> java.lang.Deprecated(boolean forRemoval=false, java.lang.String since="9")
> jakarta.mail.BodyPart:  finalize():anno 0 
> java.lang.Deprecated(boolean forRemoval=false, java.lang.String since="9")
> jakarta.mail.FetchProfile:  finalize():anno 0 
> java.lang.Deprecated(boolean forRemoval=false, java.lang.String since="9")
> jakarta.mail.FetchProfile$Item: finalize():anno 0 
> java.lang.Deprecated(boolean forRemoval=false, java.lang.String since="9")
> jakarta.mail.Flags: finalize():anno 0 java.lang.Deprecated(boolean 
> forRemoval=false, java.lang.String since="9")
> jakarta.mail.Flags$Flag:finalize():anno 0 
> java.lang.Deprecated(boolean forRemoval=false, java.lang.String since="9")
> jakarta.mail.Header:finalize():anno 0 java.lang.Deprecated(boolean 
> forRemoval=false, java.lang.String since="9")
> jakarta.mail.Message:   finalize():anno 0 
> java.lang.Deprecated(boolean forRemoval=false, java.lang.String since="9")
> jakarta.mail.Message$RecipientType: finalize():anno 0 
> java.lang.Deprecated(boolean forRemoval=false, java.lang.String since="9")
> jakarta.mail.MessageContext:finalize():anno 0 
> java.lang.Deprecated(boolean forRemoval=false, java.lang.String since="9")
> jakarta.mail.MessagingException:finalize():anno 0 
> java.lang.Deprecated(boolean forRemoval=false, java.lang.String since="9")
> jakarta.mail.Multipart: finalize():anno 0 
> java.lang.Deprecated(boolean forRemoval=false, java.lang.String since="9")
> jakarta.mail.PasswordAuthentication:finalize():anno 0 
> java.lang.Deprecated(boolean forRemoval=false, java.lang.String since="9")
> jakarta.mail.Provider:  finalize():anno 0 
> java.lang.Deprecated(boolean forRemoval=false, java.lang.String since="9")
> jakarta.mail.Provider$Type: finalize():anno 0 
> java.lang.Deprecated(boolean forRemoval=false, java.lang.String since="9")
> jakarta.mail.Quota: finalize():anno 0 java.lang.Deprecated(boolean 
> forRemoval=false, java.lang.String since="9")
> 

[jira] [Updated] (GERONIMO-6834) geronimo-jakartamail_2.1_spec (1.0.0-M1) does not pass Jakarta Mail TCK SigTests for Java 11

[Richard Zowalla (Jira)]

 [ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-6834?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
 ]

Richard Zowalla updated GERONIMO-6834:
--
Summary: geronimo-jakartamail_2.1_spec (1.0.0-M1) does not pass Jakarta 
Mail TCK SigTests for Java 11  (was: geronimo-jakartamail_2.1_spec does not 
pass Jakarta Mail TCK SigTests for Java 11)

> geronimo-jakartamail_2.1_spec (1.0.0-M1) does not pass Jakarta Mail TCK 
> SigTests for Java 11
> 
>
> Key: GERONIMO-6834
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-6834
> Project: Geronimo
>  Issue Type: Bug
>  Security Level: public(Regular issues) 
>  Components: specs
>Reporter: Richard Zowalla
>Priority: Major
>
> We have failing signature tests on *geronimo-jakartamail_2.1_spec* (1.0.0-M1)
> {code:java}
> Missing Methods
> ---
> jakarta.mail.util.SharedByteArrayInputStream:   method public 
> byte[] java.io.ByteArrayInputStream.readAllBytes()
> jakarta.mail.util.SharedByteArrayInputStream:   method public 
> byte[] java.io.InputStream.readNBytes(int) throws java.io.IOException
> jakarta.mail.util.SharedByteArrayInputStream:   method public int 
> java.io.ByteArrayInputStream.readNBytes(byte[],int,int)
> jakarta.mail.util.SharedByteArrayInputStream:   method public 
> long java.io.ByteArrayInputStream.transferTo(java.io.OutputStream) throws 
> java.io.IOException
> jakarta.mail.util.SharedByteArrayInputStream:   method public 
> static java.io.InputStream java.io.InputStream.nullInputStream()
> jakarta.mail.util.SharedFileInputStream:method public byte[] 
> java.io.InputStream.readAllBytes() throws java.io.IOException
> jakarta.mail.util.SharedFileInputStream:method public byte[] 
> java.io.InputStream.readNBytes(int) throws java.io.IOException
> jakarta.mail.util.SharedFileInputStream:method public int 
> java.io.InputStream.readNBytes(byte[],int,int) throws java.io.IOException
> jakarta.mail.util.SharedFileInputStream:method public long 
> java.io.InputStream.transferTo(java.io.OutputStream) throws 
> java.io.IOException
> jakarta.mail.util.SharedFileInputStream:method public static 
> java.io.InputStream java.io.InputStream.nullInputStream()
> Missed Annotations
> --
> jakarta.mail.Address:   finalize():anno 0 
> java.lang.Deprecated(boolean forRemoval=false, java.lang.String since="9")
> jakarta.mail.Authenticator: finalize():anno 0 
> java.lang.Deprecated(boolean forRemoval=false, java.lang.String since="9")
> jakarta.mail.BodyPart:  finalize():anno 0 
> java.lang.Deprecated(boolean forRemoval=false, java.lang.String since="9")
> jakarta.mail.FetchProfile:  finalize():anno 0 
> java.lang.Deprecated(boolean forRemoval=false, java.lang.String since="9")
> jakarta.mail.FetchProfile$Item: finalize():anno 0 
> java.lang.Deprecated(boolean forRemoval=false, java.lang.String since="9")
> jakarta.mail.Flags: finalize():anno 0 java.lang.Deprecated(boolean 
> forRemoval=false, java.lang.String since="9")
> jakarta.mail.Flags$Flag:finalize():anno 0 
> java.lang.Deprecated(boolean forRemoval=false, java.lang.String since="9")
> jakarta.mail.Header:finalize():anno 0 java.lang.Deprecated(boolean 
> forRemoval=false, java.lang.String since="9")
> jakarta.mail.Message:   finalize():anno 0 
> java.lang.Deprecated(boolean forRemoval=false, java.lang.String since="9")
> jakarta.mail.Message$RecipientType: finalize():anno 0 
> java.lang.Deprecated(boolean forRemoval=false, java.lang.String since="9")
> jakarta.mail.MessageContext:finalize():anno 0 
> java.lang.Deprecated(boolean forRemoval=false, java.lang.String since="9")
> jakarta.mail.MessagingException:finalize():anno 0 
> java.lang.Deprecated(boolean forRemoval=false, java.lang.String since="9")
> jakarta.mail.Multipart: finalize():anno 0 
> java.lang.Deprecated(boolean forRemoval=false, java.lang.String since="9")
> jakarta.mail.PasswordAuthentication:finalize():anno 0 
> java.lang.Deprecated(boolean forRemoval=false, java.lang.String since="9")
> jakarta.mail.Provider:  finalize():anno 0 
> java.lang.Deprecated(boolean forRemoval=false, java.lang.String since="9")
> jakarta.mail.Provider$Type: finalize():anno 0 
> java.lang.Deprecated(boolean forRemoval=false, java.lang.String since="9")
> jakarta.mail.Quota: finalize():anno 0 java.lang.Deprecated(boolean 
> forRemoval=false, java.lang.String since="9")
> jakarta.mail.Quota$Resource:finalize():anno 0 
> java.lang.Deprecated(boolean forRemoval=false, java.lang.String since="9")
> jakarta.mail.Session:   finalize():anno 0 
> 

[jira] [Updated] (GERONIMO-6834) geronimo-jakartamail_2.1_spec does not pass Jakarta Mail TCK SigTests for Java 11

[Richard Zowalla (Jira)]

 [ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-6834?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
 ]

Richard Zowalla updated GERONIMO-6834:
--
Description: 
We have failing signature tests on *geronimo-jakartamail_2.1_spec* (1.0.0-M1)


{code:java}
Missing Methods
---

jakarta.mail.util.SharedByteArrayInputStream:   method public 
byte[] java.io.ByteArrayInputStream.readAllBytes()
jakarta.mail.util.SharedByteArrayInputStream:   method public 
byte[] java.io.InputStream.readNBytes(int) throws java.io.IOException
jakarta.mail.util.SharedByteArrayInputStream:   method public int 
java.io.ByteArrayInputStream.readNBytes(byte[],int,int)
jakarta.mail.util.SharedByteArrayInputStream:   method public long 
java.io.ByteArrayInputStream.transferTo(java.io.OutputStream) throws 
java.io.IOException
jakarta.mail.util.SharedByteArrayInputStream:   method public 
static java.io.InputStream java.io.InputStream.nullInputStream()
jakarta.mail.util.SharedFileInputStream:method public byte[] 
java.io.InputStream.readAllBytes() throws java.io.IOException
jakarta.mail.util.SharedFileInputStream:method public byte[] 
java.io.InputStream.readNBytes(int) throws java.io.IOException
jakarta.mail.util.SharedFileInputStream:method public int 
java.io.InputStream.readNBytes(byte[],int,int) throws java.io.IOException
jakarta.mail.util.SharedFileInputStream:method public long 
java.io.InputStream.transferTo(java.io.OutputStream) throws java.io.IOException
jakarta.mail.util.SharedFileInputStream:method public static 
java.io.InputStream java.io.InputStream.nullInputStream()

Missed Annotations
--

jakarta.mail.Address:   finalize():anno 0 
java.lang.Deprecated(boolean forRemoval=false, java.lang.String since="9")
jakarta.mail.Authenticator: finalize():anno 0 
java.lang.Deprecated(boolean forRemoval=false, java.lang.String since="9")
jakarta.mail.BodyPart:  finalize():anno 0 
java.lang.Deprecated(boolean forRemoval=false, java.lang.String since="9")
jakarta.mail.FetchProfile:  finalize():anno 0 
java.lang.Deprecated(boolean forRemoval=false, java.lang.String since="9")
jakarta.mail.FetchProfile$Item: finalize():anno 0 
java.lang.Deprecated(boolean forRemoval=false, java.lang.String since="9")
jakarta.mail.Flags: finalize():anno 0 java.lang.Deprecated(boolean 
forRemoval=false, java.lang.String since="9")
jakarta.mail.Flags$Flag:finalize():anno 0 
java.lang.Deprecated(boolean forRemoval=false, java.lang.String since="9")
jakarta.mail.Header:finalize():anno 0 java.lang.Deprecated(boolean 
forRemoval=false, java.lang.String since="9")
jakarta.mail.Message:   finalize():anno 0 
java.lang.Deprecated(boolean forRemoval=false, java.lang.String since="9")
jakarta.mail.Message$RecipientType: finalize():anno 0 
java.lang.Deprecated(boolean forRemoval=false, java.lang.String since="9")
jakarta.mail.MessageContext:finalize():anno 0 
java.lang.Deprecated(boolean forRemoval=false, java.lang.String since="9")
jakarta.mail.MessagingException:finalize():anno 0 
java.lang.Deprecated(boolean forRemoval=false, java.lang.String since="9")
jakarta.mail.Multipart: finalize():anno 0 
java.lang.Deprecated(boolean forRemoval=false, java.lang.String since="9")
jakarta.mail.PasswordAuthentication:finalize():anno 0 
java.lang.Deprecated(boolean forRemoval=false, java.lang.String since="9")
jakarta.mail.Provider:  finalize():anno 0 
java.lang.Deprecated(boolean forRemoval=false, java.lang.String since="9")
jakarta.mail.Provider$Type: finalize():anno 0 
java.lang.Deprecated(boolean forRemoval=false, java.lang.String since="9")
jakarta.mail.Quota: finalize():anno 0 java.lang.Deprecated(boolean 
forRemoval=false, java.lang.String since="9")
jakarta.mail.Quota$Resource:finalize():anno 0 
java.lang.Deprecated(boolean forRemoval=false, java.lang.String since="9")
jakarta.mail.Session:   finalize():anno 0 
java.lang.Deprecated(boolean forRemoval=false, java.lang.String since="9")
jakarta.mail.URLName:   finalize():anno 0 
java.lang.Deprecated(boolean forRemoval=false, java.lang.String since="9")
jakarta.mail.event.ConnectionAdapter:   finalize():anno 0 
java.lang.Deprecated(boolean forRemoval=false, java.lang.String since="9")
jakarta.mail.event.FolderAdapter:   finalize():anno 0 
java.lang.Deprecated(boolean forRemoval=false, java.lang.String since="9")
jakarta.mail.event.MailEvent:   finalize():anno 0 
java.lang.Deprecated(boolean forRemoval=false, java.lang.String since="9")
jakarta.mail.event.MessageCountAdapter: finalize():anno 0 
java.lang.Deprecated(boolean forRemoval=false, java.lang.String since="9")
jakarta.mail.event.TransportAdapter:finalize():anno 0 
java.lang.Deprecated(boolean 

[jira] [Commented] (GERONIMO-6834) geronimo-jakartamail_2.1_spec does not pass Jakarta Mail TCK SigTests for Java 11

[Richard Zowalla (Jira)]

[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-6834?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=17541465#comment-17541465
 ] 

Richard Zowalla commented on GERONIMO-6834:
---

Signature tests work fine for Java 8


{code:java}
[javatest.batch] PASSEDcom/sun/tdk/signaturetest/SignatureTest.java

{code}


> geronimo-jakartamail_2.1_spec does not pass Jakarta Mail TCK SigTests for 
> Java 11
> -
>
> Key: GERONIMO-6834
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-6834
> Project: Geronimo
>  Issue Type: Bug
>  Security Level: public(Regular issues) 
>  Components: specs
>Reporter: Richard Zowalla
>Priority: Major
>
> We have failing signature tests on *geronimo-jakartamail_2.1_spec*
> {code:java}
> Missing Methods
> ---
> jakarta.mail.util.SharedByteArrayInputStream:   method public 
> byte[] java.io.ByteArrayInputStream.readAllBytes()
> jakarta.mail.util.SharedByteArrayInputStream:   method public 
> byte[] java.io.InputStream.readNBytes(int) throws java.io.IOException
> jakarta.mail.util.SharedByteArrayInputStream:   method public int 
> java.io.ByteArrayInputStream.readNBytes(byte[],int,int)
> jakarta.mail.util.SharedByteArrayInputStream:   method public 
> long java.io.ByteArrayInputStream.transferTo(java.io.OutputStream) throws 
> java.io.IOException
> jakarta.mail.util.SharedByteArrayInputStream:   method public 
> static java.io.InputStream java.io.InputStream.nullInputStream()
> jakarta.mail.util.SharedFileInputStream:method public byte[] 
> java.io.InputStream.readAllBytes() throws java.io.IOException
> jakarta.mail.util.SharedFileInputStream:method public byte[] 
> java.io.InputStream.readNBytes(int) throws java.io.IOException
> jakarta.mail.util.SharedFileInputStream:method public int 
> java.io.InputStream.readNBytes(byte[],int,int) throws java.io.IOException
> jakarta.mail.util.SharedFileInputStream:method public long 
> java.io.InputStream.transferTo(java.io.OutputStream) throws 
> java.io.IOException
> jakarta.mail.util.SharedFileInputStream:method public static 
> java.io.InputStream java.io.InputStream.nullInputStream()
> Missed Annotations
> --
> jakarta.mail.Address:   finalize():anno 0 
> java.lang.Deprecated(boolean forRemoval=false, java.lang.String since="9")
> jakarta.mail.Authenticator: finalize():anno 0 
> java.lang.Deprecated(boolean forRemoval=false, java.lang.String since="9")
> jakarta.mail.BodyPart:  finalize():anno 0 
> java.lang.Deprecated(boolean forRemoval=false, java.lang.String since="9")
> jakarta.mail.FetchProfile:  finalize():anno 0 
> java.lang.Deprecated(boolean forRemoval=false, java.lang.String since="9")
> jakarta.mail.FetchProfile$Item: finalize():anno 0 
> java.lang.Deprecated(boolean forRemoval=false, java.lang.String since="9")
> jakarta.mail.Flags: finalize():anno 0 java.lang.Deprecated(boolean 
> forRemoval=false, java.lang.String since="9")
> jakarta.mail.Flags$Flag:finalize():anno 0 
> java.lang.Deprecated(boolean forRemoval=false, java.lang.String since="9")
> jakarta.mail.Header:finalize():anno 0 java.lang.Deprecated(boolean 
> forRemoval=false, java.lang.String since="9")
> jakarta.mail.Message:   finalize():anno 0 
> java.lang.Deprecated(boolean forRemoval=false, java.lang.String since="9")
> jakarta.mail.Message$RecipientType: finalize():anno 0 
> java.lang.Deprecated(boolean forRemoval=false, java.lang.String since="9")
> jakarta.mail.MessageContext:finalize():anno 0 
> java.lang.Deprecated(boolean forRemoval=false, java.lang.String since="9")
> jakarta.mail.MessagingException:finalize():anno 0 
> java.lang.Deprecated(boolean forRemoval=false, java.lang.String since="9")
> jakarta.mail.Multipart: finalize():anno 0 
> java.lang.Deprecated(boolean forRemoval=false, java.lang.String since="9")
> jakarta.mail.PasswordAuthentication:finalize():anno 0 
> java.lang.Deprecated(boolean forRemoval=false, java.lang.String since="9")
> jakarta.mail.Provider:  finalize():anno 0 
> java.lang.Deprecated(boolean forRemoval=false, java.lang.String since="9")
> jakarta.mail.Provider$Type: finalize():anno 0 
> java.lang.Deprecated(boolean forRemoval=false, java.lang.String since="9")
> jakarta.mail.Quota: finalize():anno 0 java.lang.Deprecated(boolean 
> forRemoval=false, java.lang.String since="9")
> jakarta.mail.Quota$Resource:finalize():anno 0 
> java.lang.Deprecated(boolean forRemoval=false, java.lang.String since="9")
> jakarta.mail.Session:   finalize():anno 0 
> java.lang.Deprecated(boolean forRemoval=false, java.lang.String 

[jira] [Updated] (GERONIMO-6834) geronimo-jakartamail_2.1_spec does not pass Jakarta Mail TCK SigTests for Java 11

[Richard Zowalla (Jira)]

 [ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-6834?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
 ]

Richard Zowalla updated GERONIMO-6834:
--
Summary: geronimo-jakartamail_2.1_spec does not pass Jakarta Mail TCK 
SigTests for Java 11  (was: geronimo-jakartamail_2.1_spec does not pass Jakarta 
Mail TCK SigTests)

> geronimo-jakartamail_2.1_spec does not pass Jakarta Mail TCK SigTests for 
> Java 11
> -
>
> Key: GERONIMO-6834
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-6834
> Project: Geronimo
>  Issue Type: Bug
>  Security Level: public(Regular issues) 
>  Components: specs
>Reporter: Richard Zowalla
>Priority: Major
>
> We have failing signature tests on *geronimo-jakartamail_2.1_spec*
> {code:java}
> Missing Methods
> ---
> jakarta.mail.util.SharedByteArrayInputStream:   method public 
> byte[] java.io.ByteArrayInputStream.readAllBytes()
> jakarta.mail.util.SharedByteArrayInputStream:   method public 
> byte[] java.io.InputStream.readNBytes(int) throws java.io.IOException
> jakarta.mail.util.SharedByteArrayInputStream:   method public int 
> java.io.ByteArrayInputStream.readNBytes(byte[],int,int)
> jakarta.mail.util.SharedByteArrayInputStream:   method public 
> long java.io.ByteArrayInputStream.transferTo(java.io.OutputStream) throws 
> java.io.IOException
> jakarta.mail.util.SharedByteArrayInputStream:   method public 
> static java.io.InputStream java.io.InputStream.nullInputStream()
> jakarta.mail.util.SharedFileInputStream:method public byte[] 
> java.io.InputStream.readAllBytes() throws java.io.IOException
> jakarta.mail.util.SharedFileInputStream:method public byte[] 
> java.io.InputStream.readNBytes(int) throws java.io.IOException
> jakarta.mail.util.SharedFileInputStream:method public int 
> java.io.InputStream.readNBytes(byte[],int,int) throws java.io.IOException
> jakarta.mail.util.SharedFileInputStream:method public long 
> java.io.InputStream.transferTo(java.io.OutputStream) throws 
> java.io.IOException
> jakarta.mail.util.SharedFileInputStream:method public static 
> java.io.InputStream java.io.InputStream.nullInputStream()
> Missed Annotations
> --
> jakarta.mail.Address:   finalize():anno 0 
> java.lang.Deprecated(boolean forRemoval=false, java.lang.String since="9")
> jakarta.mail.Authenticator: finalize():anno 0 
> java.lang.Deprecated(boolean forRemoval=false, java.lang.String since="9")
> jakarta.mail.BodyPart:  finalize():anno 0 
> java.lang.Deprecated(boolean forRemoval=false, java.lang.String since="9")
> jakarta.mail.FetchProfile:  finalize():anno 0 
> java.lang.Deprecated(boolean forRemoval=false, java.lang.String since="9")
> jakarta.mail.FetchProfile$Item: finalize():anno 0 
> java.lang.Deprecated(boolean forRemoval=false, java.lang.String since="9")
> jakarta.mail.Flags: finalize():anno 0 java.lang.Deprecated(boolean 
> forRemoval=false, java.lang.String since="9")
> jakarta.mail.Flags$Flag:finalize():anno 0 
> java.lang.Deprecated(boolean forRemoval=false, java.lang.String since="9")
> jakarta.mail.Header:finalize():anno 0 java.lang.Deprecated(boolean 
> forRemoval=false, java.lang.String since="9")
> jakarta.mail.Message:   finalize():anno 0 
> java.lang.Deprecated(boolean forRemoval=false, java.lang.String since="9")
> jakarta.mail.Message$RecipientType: finalize():anno 0 
> java.lang.Deprecated(boolean forRemoval=false, java.lang.String since="9")
> jakarta.mail.MessageContext:finalize():anno 0 
> java.lang.Deprecated(boolean forRemoval=false, java.lang.String since="9")
> jakarta.mail.MessagingException:finalize():anno 0 
> java.lang.Deprecated(boolean forRemoval=false, java.lang.String since="9")
> jakarta.mail.Multipart: finalize():anno 0 
> java.lang.Deprecated(boolean forRemoval=false, java.lang.String since="9")
> jakarta.mail.PasswordAuthentication:finalize():anno 0 
> java.lang.Deprecated(boolean forRemoval=false, java.lang.String since="9")
> jakarta.mail.Provider:  finalize():anno 0 
> java.lang.Deprecated(boolean forRemoval=false, java.lang.String since="9")
> jakarta.mail.Provider$Type: finalize():anno 0 
> java.lang.Deprecated(boolean forRemoval=false, java.lang.String since="9")
> jakarta.mail.Quota: finalize():anno 0 java.lang.Deprecated(boolean 
> forRemoval=false, java.lang.String since="9")
> jakarta.mail.Quota$Resource:finalize():anno 0 
> java.lang.Deprecated(boolean forRemoval=false, java.lang.String since="9")
> jakarta.mail.Session:   finalize():anno 0 
> java.lang.Deprecated(boolean forRemoval=false, java.lang.String 

[jira] [Updated] (GERONIMO-6834) geronimo-jakartamail_2.1_spec does not pass Jakarta Mail TCK SigTests

[Richard Zowalla (Jira)]

 [ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-6834?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
 ]

Richard Zowalla updated GERONIMO-6834:
--
Description: 
We have failing signature tests on *geronimo-jakartamail_2.1_spec*


{code:java}
Missing Methods
---

jakarta.mail.util.SharedByteArrayInputStream:   method public 
byte[] java.io.ByteArrayInputStream.readAllBytes()
jakarta.mail.util.SharedByteArrayInputStream:   method public 
byte[] java.io.InputStream.readNBytes(int) throws java.io.IOException
jakarta.mail.util.SharedByteArrayInputStream:   method public int 
java.io.ByteArrayInputStream.readNBytes(byte[],int,int)
jakarta.mail.util.SharedByteArrayInputStream:   method public long 
java.io.ByteArrayInputStream.transferTo(java.io.OutputStream) throws 
java.io.IOException
jakarta.mail.util.SharedByteArrayInputStream:   method public 
static java.io.InputStream java.io.InputStream.nullInputStream()
jakarta.mail.util.SharedFileInputStream:method public byte[] 
java.io.InputStream.readAllBytes() throws java.io.IOException
jakarta.mail.util.SharedFileInputStream:method public byte[] 
java.io.InputStream.readNBytes(int) throws java.io.IOException
jakarta.mail.util.SharedFileInputStream:method public int 
java.io.InputStream.readNBytes(byte[],int,int) throws java.io.IOException
jakarta.mail.util.SharedFileInputStream:method public long 
java.io.InputStream.transferTo(java.io.OutputStream) throws java.io.IOException
jakarta.mail.util.SharedFileInputStream:method public static 
java.io.InputStream java.io.InputStream.nullInputStream()

Missed Annotations
--

jakarta.mail.Address:   finalize():anno 0 
java.lang.Deprecated(boolean forRemoval=false, java.lang.String since="9")
jakarta.mail.Authenticator: finalize():anno 0 
java.lang.Deprecated(boolean forRemoval=false, java.lang.String since="9")
jakarta.mail.BodyPart:  finalize():anno 0 
java.lang.Deprecated(boolean forRemoval=false, java.lang.String since="9")
jakarta.mail.FetchProfile:  finalize():anno 0 
java.lang.Deprecated(boolean forRemoval=false, java.lang.String since="9")
jakarta.mail.FetchProfile$Item: finalize():anno 0 
java.lang.Deprecated(boolean forRemoval=false, java.lang.String since="9")
jakarta.mail.Flags: finalize():anno 0 java.lang.Deprecated(boolean 
forRemoval=false, java.lang.String since="9")
jakarta.mail.Flags$Flag:finalize():anno 0 
java.lang.Deprecated(boolean forRemoval=false, java.lang.String since="9")
jakarta.mail.Header:finalize():anno 0 java.lang.Deprecated(boolean 
forRemoval=false, java.lang.String since="9")
jakarta.mail.Message:   finalize():anno 0 
java.lang.Deprecated(boolean forRemoval=false, java.lang.String since="9")
jakarta.mail.Message$RecipientType: finalize():anno 0 
java.lang.Deprecated(boolean forRemoval=false, java.lang.String since="9")
jakarta.mail.MessageContext:finalize():anno 0 
java.lang.Deprecated(boolean forRemoval=false, java.lang.String since="9")
jakarta.mail.MessagingException:finalize():anno 0 
java.lang.Deprecated(boolean forRemoval=false, java.lang.String since="9")
jakarta.mail.Multipart: finalize():anno 0 
java.lang.Deprecated(boolean forRemoval=false, java.lang.String since="9")
jakarta.mail.PasswordAuthentication:finalize():anno 0 
java.lang.Deprecated(boolean forRemoval=false, java.lang.String since="9")
jakarta.mail.Provider:  finalize():anno 0 
java.lang.Deprecated(boolean forRemoval=false, java.lang.String since="9")
jakarta.mail.Provider$Type: finalize():anno 0 
java.lang.Deprecated(boolean forRemoval=false, java.lang.String since="9")
jakarta.mail.Quota: finalize():anno 0 java.lang.Deprecated(boolean 
forRemoval=false, java.lang.String since="9")
jakarta.mail.Quota$Resource:finalize():anno 0 
java.lang.Deprecated(boolean forRemoval=false, java.lang.String since="9")
jakarta.mail.Session:   finalize():anno 0 
java.lang.Deprecated(boolean forRemoval=false, java.lang.String since="9")
jakarta.mail.URLName:   finalize():anno 0 
java.lang.Deprecated(boolean forRemoval=false, java.lang.String since="9")
jakarta.mail.event.ConnectionAdapter:   finalize():anno 0 
java.lang.Deprecated(boolean forRemoval=false, java.lang.String since="9")
jakarta.mail.event.FolderAdapter:   finalize():anno 0 
java.lang.Deprecated(boolean forRemoval=false, java.lang.String since="9")
jakarta.mail.event.MailEvent:   finalize():anno 0 
java.lang.Deprecated(boolean forRemoval=false, java.lang.String since="9")
jakarta.mail.event.MessageCountAdapter: finalize():anno 0 
java.lang.Deprecated(boolean forRemoval=false, java.lang.String since="9")
jakarta.mail.event.TransportAdapter:finalize():anno 0 
java.lang.Deprecated(boolean 

[jira] [Created] (GERONIMO-6834) geronimo-jakartamail_2.1_spec does not pass SigTests

[Richard Zowalla (Jira)]

Richard Zowalla created GERONIMO-6834:
-

 Summary: geronimo-jakartamail_2.1_spec does not pass SigTests
 Key: GERONIMO-6834
 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-6834
 Project: Geronimo
  Issue Type: Bug
  Security Level: public (Regular issues)
  Components: specs
Reporter: Richard Zowalla


We have failing signature tests on *geronimo-jakartamail_2.1_spec *


{code:java}
Missing Methods
---

jakarta.mail.util.SharedByteArrayInputStream:   method public 
byte[] java.io.ByteArrayInputStream.readAllBytes()
jakarta.mail.util.SharedByteArrayInputStream:   method public 
byte[] java.io.InputStream.readNBytes(int) throws java.io.IOException
jakarta.mail.util.SharedByteArrayInputStream:   method public int 
java.io.ByteArrayInputStream.readNBytes(byte[],int,int)
jakarta.mail.util.SharedByteArrayInputStream:   method public long 
java.io.ByteArrayInputStream.transferTo(java.io.OutputStream) throws 
java.io.IOException
jakarta.mail.util.SharedByteArrayInputStream:   method public 
static java.io.InputStream java.io.InputStream.nullInputStream()
jakarta.mail.util.SharedFileInputStream:method public byte[] 
java.io.InputStream.readAllBytes() throws java.io.IOException
jakarta.mail.util.SharedFileInputStream:method public byte[] 
java.io.InputStream.readNBytes(int) throws java.io.IOException
jakarta.mail.util.SharedFileInputStream:method public int 
java.io.InputStream.readNBytes(byte[],int,int) throws java.io.IOException
jakarta.mail.util.SharedFileInputStream:method public long 
java.io.InputStream.transferTo(java.io.OutputStream) throws java.io.IOException
jakarta.mail.util.SharedFileInputStream:method public static 
java.io.InputStream java.io.InputStream.nullInputStream()

Missed Annotations
--

jakarta.mail.Address:   finalize():anno 0 
java.lang.Deprecated(boolean forRemoval=false, java.lang.String since="9")
jakarta.mail.Authenticator: finalize():anno 0 
java.lang.Deprecated(boolean forRemoval=false, java.lang.String since="9")
jakarta.mail.BodyPart:  finalize():anno 0 
java.lang.Deprecated(boolean forRemoval=false, java.lang.String since="9")
jakarta.mail.FetchProfile:  finalize():anno 0 
java.lang.Deprecated(boolean forRemoval=false, java.lang.String since="9")
jakarta.mail.FetchProfile$Item: finalize():anno 0 
java.lang.Deprecated(boolean forRemoval=false, java.lang.String since="9")
jakarta.mail.Flags: finalize():anno 0 java.lang.Deprecated(boolean 
forRemoval=false, java.lang.String since="9")
jakarta.mail.Flags$Flag:finalize():anno 0 
java.lang.Deprecated(boolean forRemoval=false, java.lang.String since="9")
jakarta.mail.Header:finalize():anno 0 java.lang.Deprecated(boolean 
forRemoval=false, java.lang.String since="9")
jakarta.mail.Message:   finalize():anno 0 
java.lang.Deprecated(boolean forRemoval=false, java.lang.String since="9")
jakarta.mail.Message$RecipientType: finalize():anno 0 
java.lang.Deprecated(boolean forRemoval=false, java.lang.String since="9")
jakarta.mail.MessageContext:finalize():anno 0 
java.lang.Deprecated(boolean forRemoval=false, java.lang.String since="9")
jakarta.mail.MessagingException:finalize():anno 0 
java.lang.Deprecated(boolean forRemoval=false, java.lang.String since="9")
jakarta.mail.Multipart: finalize():anno 0 
java.lang.Deprecated(boolean forRemoval=false, java.lang.String since="9")
jakarta.mail.PasswordAuthentication:finalize():anno 0 
java.lang.Deprecated(boolean forRemoval=false, java.lang.String since="9")
jakarta.mail.Provider:  finalize():anno 0 
java.lang.Deprecated(boolean forRemoval=false, java.lang.String since="9")
jakarta.mail.Provider$Type: finalize():anno 0 
java.lang.Deprecated(boolean forRemoval=false, java.lang.String since="9")
jakarta.mail.Quota: finalize():anno 0 java.lang.Deprecated(boolean 
forRemoval=false, java.lang.String since="9")
jakarta.mail.Quota$Resource:finalize():anno 0 
java.lang.Deprecated(boolean forRemoval=false, java.lang.String since="9")
jakarta.mail.Session:   finalize():anno 0 
java.lang.Deprecated(boolean forRemoval=false, java.lang.String since="9")
jakarta.mail.URLName:   finalize():anno 0 
java.lang.Deprecated(boolean forRemoval=false, java.lang.String since="9")
jakarta.mail.event.ConnectionAdapter:   finalize():anno 0 
java.lang.Deprecated(boolean forRemoval=false, java.lang.String since="9")
jakarta.mail.event.FolderAdapter:   finalize():anno 0 
java.lang.Deprecated(boolean forRemoval=false, java.lang.String since="9")
jakarta.mail.event.MailEvent:   finalize():anno 0 
java.lang.Deprecated(boolean forRemoval=false, java.lang.String since="9")

Re: [VOTE] Geronimo activation_2.0_spec 1.0.0

[Zowalla, Richard]

Romain mentioned the idea (via Slack) of introducing a (cheap) system
property, which a user can specifiy to get back the old behaviour. 

If we want to follow the compatibility appraoch, we should add that
flag as the spec / RI is really unclear.


Am Dienstag, dem 24.05.2022 um 13:01 +0200 schrieb Romain Manni-Bucau:
> I conclude the same thing thanks your pointers so back to the
> question: do we want to maintain the compat for our user base, do we
> want to align on the random spec behavior or do we don't care?
> Indeed I'm always in first team, in particular there since it will be
> deprecated so the least we touch the best it is but guess it is a 50-
> 50 case in terms of actual points :s.
> 
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> @rmannibucau |  Blog | Old Blog | Github | LinkedIn | Book
> 
> 
> Le mar. 24 mai 2022 à 12:57, Zowalla, Richard <
> richard.zowa...@hs-heilbronn.de> a écrit :
> > The test in question is 
> > https://github.com/eclipse-ee4j/jaf-tck/blob/2.0.1/tests/api/javasoft/sqe/tests/jakarta/activation/ActivationDataFlavor/normalizeMimeTypeParameter_Test.java
> > 
> > which expects the plain parameter value instead of
> > "parameter=value" as
> > a return value.
> > 
> > The JavaDoc is also not quite clear about it:
> > 
> > https://jakarta.ee/specifications/activation/2.0/apidocs/jakarta.activation/jakarta/activation/activationdataflavor#normalizeMimeTypeParameter(java.lang.String,java.lang.String)
> > 
> > with "This method is called for each parameter name/value pair and
> > should return the normalized representation of the
> > parameterValue.".
> > 
> > The spec document itself 
> > https://jakarta.ee/specifications/activation/2.0/jakarta-activation-spec-2.0.html
> >  doesn't mention anything about it.
> > 
> > Guess it is a relict from java.awt.DataFlavour (also @Deprecated
> > there)
> > to keep compatibility after removing the references to it.
> > 
> > Am Dienstag, dem 24.05.2022 um 12:42 +0200 schrieb Romain Manni-
> > Bucau:
> > > Hmm, before that the question is "are the TCK spec compliant", a
> > lot
> > > have a reference in the spec we maybe missed, do you have some
> > > pointers on them? If we were wrong let's fix it, if the TCK are
> > wrong
> > > then maybe ignore the TCK?
> > > 
> > > Romain Manni-Bucau
> > > @rmannibucau |  Blog | Old Blog | Github | LinkedIn | Book
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Le mar. 24 mai 2022 à 12:33, Zowalla, Richard <
> > > richard.zowa...@hs-heilbronn.de> a écrit :
> > > > There is a TCK test regarding normalizeMimeTypeParameter which
> > > > broke with the current impl of normalizeMimeTypeParameter 
> > > > 
> > > > Therefore, I adjusted it but agree that it is mit really
> > specified.
> > > > Question would be, if it is "ok" to fail specific tests of the
> > TCK.
> > > > 
> > > > Gruß
> > > > Richard
> > > > Von: Romain Manni-Bucau 
> > > > Gesendet: Dienstag, 24. Mai 2022 11:53:37
> > > > An: dev@geronimo.apache.org
> > > > Betreff: Re: [VOTE] Geronimo activation_2.0_spec 1.0.0
> > > >  
> > > > Not voting negatively but seems we
> > > > broke normalizeMimeTypeParameter (I guess copying the RI?) and
> > I'm
> > > > not sure it should be done.
> > > > From my understanding this part is not well specified and
> > highly
> > > > depends on the impl but I don't see a reson to break existing
> > > > consumers which I always favor in regards of being aligned on
> > the
> > > > RI.
> > > > 
> > > > Romain Manni-Bucau
> > > > @rmannibucau |  Blog | Old Blog | Github | LinkedIn | Book
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > Le mar. 24 mai 2022 à 11:45, Jean-Louis Monteiro <
> > > > jlmonte...@tomitribe.com> a écrit :
> > > > > Here we go
> > > > > 
> > > > > We now pass all TCK and signature tests. Thanks Richard.
> > > > > 
> > > > > This is essentially the same as the M1 David did last week
> > but
> > > > > with the fixes for compliance (See GERONIMO-6832)
> > > > > 
> > > > > Here is the link for sources
> > > > > 
> > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/geronimo/activation_2.0_spec/
> > > > > 
> > > > > Here is the svn tag
> > > > > 
> > https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/specs/tags/geronimo-activation_2.0_spec-1.0.0/
> > > > > 
> > > > > Here is the staging repo
> > > > > 
> > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-1155
> > > > > 
> > > > > Please vote to approve this release:
> > > > > [ ] +1 Approve the release
> > > > > [ ]  0 Abstain (please provide specific comments)
> > > > > [ ] -1 Don't approve the release (please provide specific
> > > > > comments)
> > > > > 
> > > > > This vote will be open for at least 72 hours.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Thanks
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > --
> > > > > Jean-Louis Monteiro
> > > > > http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro
> > > > > http://www.tomitribe.com
> > > > > 


smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature

Re: [VOTE] Geronimo activation_2.0_spec 1.0.0

[Romain Manni-Bucau]

I conclude the same thing thanks your pointers so back to the question: do
we want to maintain the compat for our user base, do we want to align on
the random spec behavior or do we don't care?
Indeed I'm always in first team, in particular there since it will be
deprecated so the least we touch the best it is but guess it is a 50-50
case in terms of actual points :s.

Romain Manni-Bucau
@rmannibucau  |  Blog
 | Old Blog
 | Github  |
LinkedIn  | Book



Le mar. 24 mai 2022 à 12:57, Zowalla, Richard <
richard.zowa...@hs-heilbronn.de> a écrit :

> The test in question is
>
> https://github.com/eclipse-ee4j/jaf-tck/blob/2.0.1/tests/api/javasoft/sqe/tests/jakarta/activation/ActivationDataFlavor/normalizeMimeTypeParameter_Test.java
>
> which expects the plain parameter value instead of "parameter=value" as
> a return value.
>
> The JavaDoc is also not quite clear about it:
>
>
> https://jakarta.ee/specifications/activation/2.0/apidocs/jakarta.activation/jakarta/activation/activationdataflavor#normalizeMimeTypeParameter(java.lang.String,java.lang.String)
>
> with "This method is called for each parameter name/value pair and
> should return the normalized representation of the parameterValue.".
>
> The spec document itself
>
> https://jakarta.ee/specifications/activation/2.0/jakarta-activation-spec-2.0.html
>  doesn't mention anything about it.
>
> Guess it is a relict from java.awt.DataFlavour (also @Deprecated there)
> to keep compatibility after removing the references to it.
>
> Am Dienstag, dem 24.05.2022 um 12:42 +0200 schrieb Romain Manni-Bucau:
> > Hmm, before that the question is "are the TCK spec compliant", a lot
> > have a reference in the spec we maybe missed, do you have some
> > pointers on them? If we were wrong let's fix it, if the TCK are wrong
> > then maybe ignore the TCK?
> >
> > Romain Manni-Bucau
> > @rmannibucau |  Blog | Old Blog | Github | LinkedIn | Book
> >
> >
> > Le mar. 24 mai 2022 à 12:33, Zowalla, Richard <
> > richard.zowa...@hs-heilbronn.de> a écrit :
> > > There is a TCK test regarding normalizeMimeTypeParameter which
> > > broke with the current impl of normalizeMimeTypeParameter
> > >
> > > Therefore, I adjusted it but agree that it is mit really specified.
> > > Question would be, if it is "ok" to fail specific tests of the TCK.
> > >
> > > Gruß
> > > Richard
> > > Von: Romain Manni-Bucau 
> > > Gesendet: Dienstag, 24. Mai 2022 11:53:37
> > > An: dev@geronimo.apache.org
> > > Betreff: Re: [VOTE] Geronimo activation_2.0_spec 1.0.0
> > >
> > > Not voting negatively but seems we
> > > broke normalizeMimeTypeParameter (I guess copying the RI?) and I'm
> > > not sure it should be done.
> > > From my understanding this part is not well specified and highly
> > > depends on the impl but I don't see a reson to break existing
> > > consumers which I always favor in regards of being aligned on the
> > > RI.
> > >
> > > Romain Manni-Bucau
> > > @rmannibucau |  Blog | Old Blog | Github | LinkedIn | Book
> > >
> > >
> > > Le mar. 24 mai 2022 à 11:45, Jean-Louis Monteiro <
> > > jlmonte...@tomitribe.com> a écrit :
> > > > Here we go
> > > >
> > > > We now pass all TCK and signature tests. Thanks Richard.
> > > >
> > > > This is essentially the same as the M1 David did last week but
> > > > with the fixes for compliance (See GERONIMO-6832)
> > > >
> > > > Here is the link for sources
> > > > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/geronimo/activation_2.0_spec/
> > > >
> > > > Here is the svn tag
> > > >
> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/specs/tags/geronimo-activation_2.0_spec-1.0.0/
> > > >
> > > > Here is the staging repo
> > > >
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-1155
> > > >
> > > > Please vote to approve this release:
> > > > [ ] +1 Approve the release
> > > > [ ]  0 Abstain (please provide specific comments)
> > > > [ ] -1 Don't approve the release (please provide specific
> > > > comments)
> > > >
> > > > This vote will be open for at least 72 hours.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Jean-Louis Monteiro
> > > > http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro
> > > > http://www.tomitribe.com
> > > >
>

Re: [VOTE] Geronimo activation_2.0_spec 1.0.0

[Zowalla, Richard]

The test in question is 
https://github.com/eclipse-ee4j/jaf-tck/blob/2.0.1/tests/api/javasoft/sqe/tests/jakarta/activation/ActivationDataFlavor/normalizeMimeTypeParameter_Test.java

which expects the plain parameter value instead of "parameter=value" as
a return value.

The JavaDoc is also not quite clear about it:

https://jakarta.ee/specifications/activation/2.0/apidocs/jakarta.activation/jakarta/activation/activationdataflavor#normalizeMimeTypeParameter(java.lang.String,java.lang.String)

with "This method is called for each parameter name/value pair and
should return the normalized representation of the parameterValue.".

The spec document itself 
https://jakarta.ee/specifications/activation/2.0/jakarta-activation-spec-2.0.html
 doesn't mention anything about it.

Guess it is a relict from java.awt.DataFlavour (also @Deprecated there)
to keep compatibility after removing the references to it.

Am Dienstag, dem 24.05.2022 um 12:42 +0200 schrieb Romain Manni-Bucau:
> Hmm, before that the question is "are the TCK spec compliant", a lot
> have a reference in the spec we maybe missed, do you have some
> pointers on them? If we were wrong let's fix it, if the TCK are wrong
> then maybe ignore the TCK?
> 
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> @rmannibucau |  Blog | Old Blog | Github | LinkedIn | Book
> 
> 
> Le mar. 24 mai 2022 à 12:33, Zowalla, Richard <
> richard.zowa...@hs-heilbronn.de> a écrit :
> > There is a TCK test regarding normalizeMimeTypeParameter which
> > broke with the current impl of normalizeMimeTypeParameter 
> > 
> > Therefore, I adjusted it but agree that it is mit really specified.
> > Question would be, if it is "ok" to fail specific tests of the TCK.
> > 
> > Gruß
> > Richard
> > Von: Romain Manni-Bucau 
> > Gesendet: Dienstag, 24. Mai 2022 11:53:37
> > An: dev@geronimo.apache.org
> > Betreff: Re: [VOTE] Geronimo activation_2.0_spec 1.0.0
> >  
> > Not voting negatively but seems we
> > broke normalizeMimeTypeParameter (I guess copying the RI?) and I'm
> > not sure it should be done.
> > From my understanding this part is not well specified and highly
> > depends on the impl but I don't see a reson to break existing
> > consumers which I always favor in regards of being aligned on the
> > RI.
> > 
> > Romain Manni-Bucau
> > @rmannibucau |  Blog | Old Blog | Github | LinkedIn | Book
> > 
> > 
> > Le mar. 24 mai 2022 à 11:45, Jean-Louis Monteiro <
> > jlmonte...@tomitribe.com> a écrit :
> > > Here we go
> > > 
> > > We now pass all TCK and signature tests. Thanks Richard.
> > > 
> > > This is essentially the same as the M1 David did last week but
> > > with the fixes for compliance (See GERONIMO-6832)
> > > 
> > > Here is the link for sources
> > > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/geronimo/activation_2.0_spec/
> > > 
> > > Here is the svn tag
> > > https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/specs/tags/geronimo-activation_2.0_spec-1.0.0/
> > > 
> > > Here is the staging repo
> > > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-1155
> > > 
> > > Please vote to approve this release:
> > > [ ] +1 Approve the release
> > > [ ]  0 Abstain (please provide specific comments)
> > > [ ] -1 Don't approve the release (please provide specific
> > > comments)
> > > 
> > > This vote will be open for at least 72 hours.
> > > 
> > > Thanks
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > --
> > > Jean-Louis Monteiro
> > > http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro
> > > http://www.tomitribe.com
> > > 


smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature

Re: [VOTE] Geronimo activation_2.0_spec 1.0.0

[Romain Manni-Bucau]

Hmm, before that the question is "are the TCK spec compliant", a lot have a
reference in the spec we maybe missed, do you have some pointers on them?
If we were wrong let's fix it, if the TCK are wrong then maybe ignore the
TCK?

Romain Manni-Bucau
@rmannibucau  |  Blog
 | Old Blog
 | Github  |
LinkedIn  | Book



Le mar. 24 mai 2022 à 12:33, Zowalla, Richard <
richard.zowa...@hs-heilbronn.de> a écrit :

> There is a TCK test regarding normalizeMimeTypeParameter which broke with
> the current impl of normalizeMimeTypeParameter
>
> Therefore, I adjusted it but agree that it is mit really specified.
> Question would be, if it is "ok" to fail specific tests of the TCK.
>
> Gruß
> Richard
> --
> *Von:* Romain Manni-Bucau 
> *Gesendet:* Dienstag, 24. Mai 2022 11:53:37
> *An:* dev@geronimo.apache.org
> *Betreff:* Re: [VOTE] Geronimo activation_2.0_spec 1.0.0
>
> Not voting negatively but seems we broke normalizeMimeTypeParameter (I
> guess copying the RI?) and I'm not sure it should be done.
> From my understanding this part is not well specified and highly depends
> on the impl but I don't see a reson to break existing consumers which I
> always favor in regards of being aligned on the RI.
>
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> @rmannibucau  |  Blog
>  | Old Blog
>  | Github
>  | LinkedIn
>  | Book
> 
>
>
> Le mar. 24 mai 2022 à 11:45, Jean-Louis Monteiro 
> a écrit :
>
>> Here we go
>>
>> We now pass all TCK and signature tests. Thanks Richard.
>>
>> This is essentially the same as the M1 David did last week but with the
>> fixes for compliance (See GERONIMO-6832)
>>
>> Here is the link for sources
>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/geronimo/activation_2.0_spec/
>>
>> Here is the svn tag
>>
>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/specs/tags/geronimo-activation_2.0_spec-1.0.0/
>>
>> Here is the staging repo
>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-1155
>>
>> Please vote to approve this release:
>> [ ] +1 Approve the release
>> [ ]  0 Abstain (please provide specific comments)
>> [ ] -1 Don't approve the release (please provide specific comments)
>>
>> This vote will be open for at least 72 hours.
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Jean-Louis Monteiro
>> http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro
>> http://www.tomitribe.com
>>
>

AW: [VOTE] Geronimo activation_2.0_spec 1.0.0

[Zowalla, Richard]

There is a TCK test regarding normalizeMimeTypeParameter which broke with the 
current impl of normalizeMimeTypeParameter

Therefore, I adjusted it but agree that it is mit really specified. Question 
would be, if it is "ok" to fail specific tests of the TCK.

Gruß
Richard

Von: Romain Manni-Bucau 
Gesendet: Dienstag, 24. Mai 2022 11:53:37
An: dev@geronimo.apache.org
Betreff: Re: [VOTE] Geronimo activation_2.0_spec 1.0.0

Not voting negatively but seems we broke normalizeMimeTypeParameter (I guess 
copying the RI?) and I'm not sure it should be done.
>From my understanding this part is not well specified and highly depends on 
>the impl but I don't see a reson to break existing consumers which I always 
>favor in regards of being aligned on the RI.

Romain Manni-Bucau
@rmannibucau |  
Blog | Old 
Blog | Github 
| LinkedIn | 
Book


Le mar. 24 mai 2022 à 11:45, Jean-Louis Monteiro 
mailto:jlmonte...@tomitribe.com>> a écrit :
Here we go

We now pass all TCK and signature tests. Thanks Richard.

This is essentially the same as the M1 David did last week but with the fixes 
for compliance (See GERONIMO-6832)

Here is the link for sources
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/geronimo/activation_2.0_spec/

Here is the svn tag
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/specs/tags/geronimo-activation_2.0_spec-1.0.0/

Here is the staging repo
https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-1155

Please vote to approve this release:
[ ] +1 Approve the release
[ ]  0 Abstain (please provide specific comments)
[ ] -1 Don't approve the release (please provide specific comments)

This vote will be open for at least 72 hours.

Thanks



--
Jean-Louis Monteiro
http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro
http://www.tomitribe.com

Re: [VOTE] Geronimo activation_2.0_spec 1.0.0

[Romain Manni-Bucau]

Not voting negatively but seems we broke normalizeMimeTypeParameter (I
guess copying the RI?) and I'm not sure it should be done.
>From my understanding this part is not well specified and highly depends on
the impl but I don't see a reson to break existing consumers which I always
favor in regards of being aligned on the RI.

Romain Manni-Bucau
@rmannibucau  |  Blog
 | Old Blog
 | Github  |
LinkedIn  | Book



Le mar. 24 mai 2022 à 11:45, Jean-Louis Monteiro 
a écrit :

> Here we go
>
> We now pass all TCK and signature tests. Thanks Richard.
>
> This is essentially the same as the M1 David did last week but with the
> fixes for compliance (See GERONIMO-6832)
>
> Here is the link for sources
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/geronimo/activation_2.0_spec/
>
> Here is the svn tag
>
> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/specs/tags/geronimo-activation_2.0_spec-1.0.0/
>
> Here is the staging repo
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-1155
>
> Please vote to approve this release:
> [ ] +1 Approve the release
> [ ]  0 Abstain (please provide specific comments)
> [ ] -1 Don't approve the release (please provide specific comments)
>
> This vote will be open for at least 72 hours.
>
> Thanks
>
>
>
> --
> Jean-Louis Monteiro
> http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro
> http://www.tomitribe.com
>

[VOTE] Geronimo activation_2.0_spec 1.0.0

[Jean-Louis Monteiro]

Here we go

We now pass all TCK and signature tests. Thanks Richard.

This is essentially the same as the M1 David did last week but with the
fixes for compliance (See GERONIMO-6832)

Here is the link for sources
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/geronimo/activation_2.0_spec/

Here is the svn tag
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/specs/tags/geronimo-activation_2.0_spec-1.0.0/

Here is the staging repo
https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-1155

Please vote to approve this release:
[ ] +1 Approve the release
[ ]  0 Abstain (please provide specific comments)
[ ] -1 Don't approve the release (please provide specific comments)

This vote will be open for at least 72 hours.

Thanks



--
Jean-Louis Monteiro
http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro
http://www.tomitribe.com

[jira] [Resolved] (GERONIMO-6833) Ensure proxy hierarchy is registered for native-image

[Romain Manni-Bucau (Jira)]

 [ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-6833?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
 ]

Romain Manni-Bucau resolved GERONIMO-6833.
--
Resolution: Fixed

> Ensure proxy hierarchy is registered for native-image
> -
>
> Key: GERONIMO-6833
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-6833
> Project: Geronimo
>  Issue Type: Bug
>  Security Level: public(Regular issues) 
>Reporter: Romain Manni-Bucau
>Priority: Major
> Fix For: Arthur-1.0.6
>
>




--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.20.7#820007)

[jira] [Created] (GERONIMO-6833) Ensure proxy hierarchy is registered for native-image

[Romain Manni-Bucau (Jira)]

Romain Manni-Bucau created GERONIMO-6833:


 Summary: Ensure proxy hierarchy is registered for native-image
 Key: GERONIMO-6833
 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-6833
 Project: Geronimo
  Issue Type: Bug
  Security Level: public (Regular issues)
Reporter: Romain Manni-Bucau
 Fix For: Arthur-1.0.6






--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.20.7#820007)

Re: Submitting a CCR for Geronimo Mail and Activation

[Romain Manni-Bucau]

Hi,

We must run a release before that (at apache at least) AFAIK but +1
otherwise.

Romain Manni-Bucau
@rmannibucau  |  Blog
 | Old Blog
 | Github  |
LinkedIn  | Book



Le mar. 24 mai 2022 à 11:22, Jean-Louis Monteiro 
a écrit :

> Hello,
>
> With the last release David did, Richard ran the TCK and the signature
> tests and it looks like we are now fully compliant.
>
> What about submitting a CCR to Eclipse foundation Jakarta to be listed as
> a compliant implementation?
>
> --
> Jean-Louis Monteiro
> http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro
> http://www.tomitribe.com
>

Re: GERONIMO-6832 - SigTests + TCK Failures for Activation 2.0.0-M1

[Jean-Louis MONTEIRO]

Hi Richard,

I reviewed and merged you diff.

Thanks

Le lun. 23 mai 2022 à 21:56, Zowalla, Richard <
richard.zowa...@hs-heilbronn.de> a écrit :

> Hi all,
>
> I gave it a try: the main issues were related to the change regarding
> java.desktop.
>
> I added a patch (svn diff) to
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-6832 with some changes.
> With this changes, the TCK + Sigtests are now passing for Java 8 + Java
> 11:
>
> [javatest.batch] Number of tests completed:  90 (90 pass, 0 fail, 0
> errors)
> [javatest.batch]
> ***
> [javatest.batch] Completed running 90 tests.
> [javatest.batch] Number of Tests Passed  = 90
> [javatest.batch] Number of Tests Failed  = 0
> [javatest.batch] Number of Tests with Errors = 0
> [javatest.batch] Number of Tests Not Run = 0
>
> If someone can have a look, it would be appreciated.
>
> Gruß
> Richard
>
>
> Am Montag, dem 23.05.2022 um 18:47 + schrieb Zowalla, Richard:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > I did run the sig tests + tck on the 2.0.0-M1 and found some issues.
> > Subsequently, I created
> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-6832 and will try to
> > fix
> > them.
> >
> > Gruß
> > Richard
> >
>
>

-- 
Jean-Louis

[jira] [Resolved] (GERONIMO-6832) Fix TCK + Signature Tests for geronimo-activation_2.0_spec

[Jean-Louis Monteiro (Jira)]

 [ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-6832?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
 ]

Jean-Louis Monteiro resolved GERONIMO-6832.
---
Fix Version/s: Spec_Activation_2.0_1.0.0
   Resolution: Fixed

Thanks Richard

> Fix TCK + Signature Tests for geronimo-activation_2.0_spec
> --
>
> Key: GERONIMO-6832
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-6832
> Project: Geronimo
>  Issue Type: Bug
>  Security Level: public(Regular issues) 
>Reporter: Richard Zowalla
>Priority: Major
> Fix For: Spec_Activation_2.0_1.0.0
>
> Attachments: GERONIMO-6832.diff
>
>
> Did run the sigtests + TCK and found some issues.
> Sigtests currently fail due to some issues regarding the removal of the 
> depenency towards java.desktop + TCK also have has issues.
> Did test with the milestone version. I will try to fix them.



--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.20.7#820007)

Submitting a CCR for Geronimo Mail and Activation

[Jean-Louis Monteiro]

Hello,

With the last release David did, Richard ran the TCK and the signature
tests and it looks like we are now fully compliant.

What about submitting a CCR to Eclipse foundation Jakarta to be listed as a
compliant implementation?

--
Jean-Louis Monteiro
http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro
http://www.tomitribe.com

Re: [VOTE] Release Mail 2.0.0-M1

[Romain Manni-Bucau]

Side note: referencing tag+hash + dist (dev) area (only thing we vote
against) would be neat for future votes since we dont vote on a staging
repo.

Anyway thanks for doing it, really great to see you back ;)

PS: dont forget jira and site updates, we missed it by the past and hurts
way later when we need to catch up.

Le lun. 23 mai 2022 à 18:15, David Blevins  a
écrit :

> Vote passes with 6 +1s (4 binding)
>
> As noted in the other vote I didn't propose a final as we haven't yet run
> the full set of TCK tests for this library, specifically the signature
> tests.  In particular, the signature tests verify all the classes and
> method signatures match the expected set and there are no
> additions/changes, etc.  These are separate from the
> com.sun.ts.tests.javamail tests.
>
> In the past we would always ensure these tests before releasing.
>
>
> -David
>
>
> > On May 14, 2022, at 2:27 PM, David Blevins 
> wrote:
> >
> > Hey All,
> >
> > If I was thinking ahead I'd have put these both in the same staging repo
> and vote :)
> >
> > Staging Maven repository:
> >
> > -
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-1153/
> >
> > The only change is conversion from javax to the jakarta namespace via
> contributor Richard Zowalla and a change from "javamail" to simply "mail"
> >
> >
> > Please vote to approve this release:
> > [ ] +1 Approve the release
> > [ ]  0 Abstain (please provide specific comments)
> > [ ] -1 Don't approve the release (please provide specific comments)
> >
> > This vote will be open for at least 72 hours.
> >
> > -David
> >
>
>