Re: TomEE8 TCK status

Or just compile it yourself from source: https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/tomee/javaee-api/trunk LieGrue, strub > Am 16.02.2018 um 07:41 schrieb Mark Struberg : > > I think we did, but I probably did not deploy our javaee-api yet. > > Started the deploy jus tnow. > >

Re: TomEE8 TCK status

I think we did, but I probably did not deploy our javaee-api yet. Started the deploy jus tnow. LieGrue, strub > Am 16.02.2018 um 07:14 schrieb Romain Manni-Bucau : > > Dont think our ee api has upgraded to >

Re: TomEE8 TCK status

Dont think our ee api has upgraded to https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/specs/trunk/geronimo-jaxrs_2.1_spec/ yet since we didnt have cxf 3.2. Le 16 févr. 2018 00:49, "Jonathan Gallimore" a écrit : > Ok, locally (with the merge), I get test errors due > to:

Re: TomEE8 TCK status

Ok, locally (with the merge), I get test errors due to: java.lang.NoClassDefFoundError: javax/ws/rs/client/CompletionStageRxInvoker. Possibly a bad javaee dependency or something. I'll do a compare tomorrow and try and get that resolved, and get my changes pushed. Jon On Thu, Feb 15, 2018 at

Re: TomEE8 TCK status

PS: xbean-asm6 is needed for java9 support. Already using it in OWB and Meecrowave without any problems. So all should work fine. LieGrue, strub > Am 15.02.2018 um 19:20 schrieb Mark Struberg : > > oki great, I've just upgraded to tomcat-9.0.5 and right now

Re: TomEE8 TCK status

oki great, I've just upgraded to tomcat-9.0.5 and right now upgrading to xbean-asm6-shaded. Will ping you once done. LieGrue, strub > Am 15.02.2018 um 18:27 schrieb Jonathan Gallimore > : > > We definitely need a tomee-7 branch. I have done a merge of master to

Re: TomEE8 TCK status

We definitely need a tomee-7 branch. I have done a merge of master to the tomee8_fb branch, and I'm making sure it builds and tests pass etc, before pushing. Jon On Thu, Feb 15, 2018 at 5:19 PM, Mark Struberg wrote: > probably a good idea. > > A tomee7 release should

Re: TomEE8 TCK status

probably a good idea. A tomee7 release should still be cut. But that could be done on a tomee7.x branch as well Will create a separate thread. LieGrue, strub > Am 15.02.2018 um 18:11 schrieb Romain Manni-Bucau : > > and probably switch the branch. master doesnt get

Re: TomEE8 TCK status

and probably switch the branch. master doesnt get much activity and in any case all the activity it gets can be done on the 8 branch Romain Manni-Bucau @rmannibucau | Blog | Old Blog |

Re: TomEE8 TCK status

and now we should be passing both the tck/cdi-embedded and tck/cdi-tomee! So it's time to move forward to updating various dependencies, samples etc ;) LieGrue, strub > Am 15.02.2018 um 11:42 schrieb Mark Struberg : > > Really appreciated, thanks Jon! > > Due to the

Re: TomEE8 TCK status

Really appreciated, thanks Jon! Due to the upgrade to Tomcat-9 we also might have to fix a few other tests along the line. I mainly focused on the CDI TCK for now as this is naturally the area where I can be of most use. I'll also gonna release OWB tonight or so. Just wanted to first fix the

Re: TomEE8 TCK status

At the risk of adding to my ever-growing task list and potentially becoming a bottleneck, I did some EAR / RAR related fixes in master. I'll port those forward and help look at these tests. Jon On Wed, Feb 14, 2018 at 10:28 PM, Mark Struberg wrote: > We now pass all

Re: TomEE8 TCK status

2018-02-14 23:28 GMT+01:00 Mark Struberg : > We now pass all tests in tck/cdi-embedded > And we have only 3 failing tests in tck/cdi-tomee. > > > > > > Those tests are all EAR related. > Maybe they are only Arquillian adapter issues? > Don't think so, ear deployment

Re: TomEE8 TCK status

We now pass all tests in tck/cdi-embedded And we have only 3 failing tests in tck/cdi-tomee. Those tests are all EAR related. Maybe they are only Arquillian adapter issues? LieGrue, strub > Am 08.02.2018 um 13:30 schrieb Mark Struberg : > > Well, this is why

Re: TomEE8 TCK status

Well, this is why there are passivation listeners and stuff in the Servlet spec. We could easily also send a specific CDI event for it. But there is no such event in the CDI spec so far. The @Destryoed and @BeforeDestroyed are specifically for _destroyal_. LieGrue, strub > Am 08.02.2018 um

Re: TomEE8 TCK status

Hmm, it is more vicious cause if the session is not destroyed you can still want to trigger this event. Guess it is another case where both cases are desirable (i want to clean up related state of the session...as well as I don't want to touch the session)... Since the appcontext destroy can be

Re: TomEE8 TCK status

Yea, it's mainly testing whether the @Observes @BeforeDestroyed(SessionScoped.class) and @Destroyed(SessionScoped.class) do work. The tests itself are fine, but instead of relying that the sessions get destroyed at server shutdown they could also have used Session.invalidate()... LieGrue,

Re: TomEE8 TCK status

2018-02-08 11:28 GMT+01:00 Mark Struberg : > All the embedded tests are now green. > > I'm now working on cdi-tomes (webprofile TCK). > So far we have 10 errors, but a few TCK tests are broken because they > wrongly assume that a container stop also kills the Session. >

Re: TomEE8 TCK status

All the embedded tests are now green. I'm now working on cdi-tomes (webprofile TCK). So far we have 10 errors, but a few TCK tests are broken because they wrongly assume that a container stop also kills the Session. I've challenged those tests. Still have to review every red test... LieGrue,

Re: TomEE8 TCK status

[ERROR] Failures: [ERROR] EnterpriseDefaultBeanDiscoveryModeTest>Arquillian.arquillianBeforeClass:109 » Deployment [INFO] [ERROR] Tests run: 1567, Failures: 1, Errors: 0, Skipped: 5 Wohuuu, 1 to go! LieGrue, strub > Am 02.02.2018 um 21:54 schrieb Mark Struberg :

Re: TomEE8 TCK status

And the last status: [ERROR] Failures: [ERROR] EnterpriseDefaultBeanDiscoveryModeTest>Arquillian.arquillianBeforeClass:109 » Deployment [ERROR] ContainerLifeCycleEventRuntimeInvocationTest>Arquillian.arquillianBeforeClass:109 » Deployment [ERROR]

Re: TomEE8 TCK status

Hello, I will be able to use (and thus, to make feedbacks) on a TomEE+ 8 binary preview release if it includes JAX RS 2.1 : I have some fun stuff to do with SSE for feeding some reactive uis :) Best regards, Alex 2018-02-01 16:39 GMT+01:00 Romain Manni-Bucau : > a lot of

Re: TomEE8 TCK status

a lot of libs should be updated before the release I think, like johnzon which is ready (literally like 2 poms to update). but yes we can do a release anytime technically. In terms of first bundle we can at least desire to have CDI 2 webprofile support, probably json-p/json-b and maybe jax-rs

Re: TomEE8 TCK status

These are CDI TCK only. Java EE 8 TCK aren't available openly (Open sourced) so we can't certify the Apache version of TomEE -- Jean-Louis Monteiro http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro http://www.tomitribe.com On Thu, Feb 1, 2018 at 3:36 PM, Matthew Broadhead < matthew.broadh...@nbmlaw.co.uk>

Re: TomEE8 TCK status

exciting.  when it passes all the tests will there be a beta release ? On 01/02/2018 14:37, Mark Struberg wrote: With a bit help from Romains we are now down to 10 failing tests: ERROR] Failures: [ERROR]   EnterpriseDefaultBeanDiscoveryModeTest>Arquillian.arquillianBeforeClass:109 »

Re: TomEE8 TCK status

With a bit help from Romains we are now down to 10 failing tests: ERROR] Failures: [ERROR]   EnterpriseDefaultBeanDiscoveryModeTest>Arquillian.arquillianBeforeClass:109 » Deployment [ERROR]   ObserverMethodInvocationContextTest>Arquillian.run:164->testTransactionalObserverMethod:55 » EJB

Re: TomEE8 TCK status

Fixed the new CDI-2.0 feature. Now down to 16 ^^ [ERROR] Failures: [ERROR] EnterpriseDefaultBeanDiscoveryModeTest>Arquillian.arquillianBeforeClass:109 » Deployment [ERROR] ResourceAdapterArchiveTest>Arquillian.run:164->testInjection:79 expected object to not be null [ERROR]

Re: TomEE8 TCK status

>From memory, until you need jsf or advanced web stuff all should run in embedded mode. That said we can need to tune jaas to match the expectations of the tcks. Romain Manni-Bucau @rmannibucau | Blog | Old Blog

Re: TomEE8 TCK status

Txs JL! Btw, this is the current status: [ERROR] Failures: [ERROR] EnterpriseDefaultBeanDiscoveryModeTest>Arquillian.arquillianBeforeClass:109 » Deployment [ERROR] ResourceAdapterArchiveTest>Arquillian.run:164->testInjection:79 expected object to not be null [ERROR]

Re: TomEE8 TCK status

Then we should at least add a README? Or at least document that profile in the pom. LieGrue, strub > Am 31.01.2018 um 09:59 schrieb Romain Manni-Bucau : > > 2018-01-31 9:34 GMT+01:00 Mark Struberg : > >> Yes I thought something similar when

Re: TomEE8 TCK status

2018-01-31 9:34 GMT+01:00 Mark Struberg : > Yes I thought something similar when trashing 2 hours to try to get the > JAXB generator running. > Just to figure it might be broken beyond repair... > Thanks that you at least confirm this view and spare me further >

Re: TomEE8 TCK status

Yes I thought something similar when trashing 2 hours to try to get the JAXB generator running. Just to figure it might be broken beyond repair... Thanks that you at least confirm this view and spare me further investigation. There are 2 options on the table 1.) Do a quick hack and add the

Re: TomEE8 TCK status

Hi Mark, For simple updates like that I tend to update the sax parser manually (that's what we did for JSF since most of the model is not handled by tomee anyway). For CDI we are supposed to still use JAXB (since there can be a lot of beans.xml):

TomEE8 TCK status

Hi folks! I've come down to just 18 failing tests in tck/cdi-embedded.Most of them are EE related (missing privileges exceptions etc) There is one left with the CDI integration: support.This needs a change in the beans.xml schema.I've added the changes and moved to