Re: TCK Signature for EL API

Hi, On Tue, Apr 6, 2021 at 7:22 PM Raymond Augé wrote: > Great news! I'm both sad that the annotations caused you pain (the complete > opposite was intended) and happy that you managed to work around the > problem. > > It's not by coincidence that BND uses the intermediate state of the > manifes

Re: TCK Signature for EL API

Great news! I'm both sad that the annotations caused you pain (the complete opposite was intended) and happy that you managed to work around the problem. It's not by coincidence that BND uses the intermediate state of the manifest to go between the annotations and the module info. However, I wasn'

Re: TCK Signature for EL API

On 02/04/2021 13:58, Raymond Augé wrote: I just wanted to make a note that removing the annotation will also mean that the module-info.java will need to be manually managed since bnd also generated that based on the annotations. Good news. I compared the module-info.class files for the EL API j

Re: TCK Signature for EL API

Isn't it stable enough to use bcel or asm to write it? Romain Manni-Bucau @rmannibucau | Blog | Old Blog | Github | LinkedIn

Re: TCK Signature for EL API

On 02/04/2021 13:58, Raymond Augé wrote: I just wanted to make a note that removing the annotation will also mean that the module-info.java will need to be manually managed since bnd also generated that based on the annotations. That might be more problematic. Sigh. I'll look into that next wee

Re: TCK Signature for EL API

I just wanted to make a note that removing the annotation will also mean that the module-info.java will need to be manually managed since bnd also generated that based on the annotations. Just FYI, - Ray On Thu, Apr 1, 2021 at 4:40 AM Jean-Louis MONTEIRO wrote: > That's awesome news. > > I'm gl

Re: TCK Signature for EL API

That's awesome news. I'm glad it's something that can be achieved without too much effort. I understand and buy the pragmatic approach. But at the same time, if we can do a step forward and get even closer to being certified, that'd be great. Le jeu. 1 avr. 2021 à 10:06, Mark Thomas a écrit :

Re: TCK Signature for EL API

I've been playing with this a bit more and it appears we can simply hard-code the "Require-Capability" header in el-api.jar.bnd Having taken the time to look at the actual values generated for these API JARs, this does look like something that would be simple to maintain manually - especially

Re: TCK Signature for EL API

Hi, AFAIK TomEE will try to be certified and will try to not fork as much as possible Tomcat code so can be neat to solve it in particular when relatively easy: 1. compile tomcat classes with bnd as of today 2. run bnd to get the manifest.mf ( 3. post process tomcat classes to remove bnd from the

Re: TCK Signature for EL API

On 31/03/2021 20:14, Volodymyr Siedlecki wrote: Hello, It appears the TCK Signature tests will not be relaxed (see 1 & 2), and I'm wondering how Tomcat will proceed with the bnd annotation in the EL API? Will it be removed in the next release? Currently, there are no plans to change the Tomcat

TCK Signature for EL API

Hello, It appears the TCK Signature tests will not be relaxed (see 1 & 2), and I'm wondering how Tomcat will proceed with the bnd annotation in the EL API? Will it be removed in the next release? Thank you, Volodymyr 1) https://github.com/eclipse-ee4j/jakartaee-tck/issues/643 (Scott's last comm