RE: JSR-283 TCK?
Thanks, Roy and Bertrand, it's clear now. Note that you only need the TCK if you are implementing an independent implementation, or if you want to certify a forked version of Jackrabbit. The Apache Jackrabbit release builds are already tested against the TCK. We'll just stick to Jackrabbit without the fork :) Kind regards, Met vriendelijke groet, Arjé Cahn Hippo Oosteinde 11 1017WT Amsterdam The Netherlands Tel +31 (0)20 5224466 [EMAIL PROTECTED] / [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Hippo http://www.hippo.nl Hippo CMS community http://www.hippocms.org My weblog http://blogs.hippo.nl/arje -- Upcoming presentation June 25th, New York: Open Source Content Management in the Enterprise http://www.soaeosconference.sys-con.com/general/session07.htm?id=30 --
Re: JSR-283 TCK?
On 7/4/07, Arje Cahn [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: ...I'm not sure whether this has been discussed on the list already, but what happens to Jackrabbit when the Apache JCP policy proposal gets voted in and the ASF will no longer accept a JSR-283 TCK? (or is that not the case..?)... I'll leave it to others to comment on the openness of JSR 170 and 283, but here are some links to give people more context. I assume you refer to the proposal and discussions listed here: http://davanum.wordpress.com/2007/07/03/implementing-jsrs-apache-radical-shift/ Note that the proposal is being rejected in the vote thread: http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.apache.jcp-open/259 And I tend to agree with Roy when he says such decisions belong to the ASF board anyway: http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.apache.jcp-open/259/focus=288 So it doesn't look like the proposal will be accepted as is. I don't mean to flag your question as irrelevant, but just make sure people have the right context to interpret it ;-) -Bertrand
Re: JSR-283 TCK?
On Jul 4, 2007, at 12:42 AM, Arje Cahn wrote: I'm not sure whether this has been discussed on the list already, but what happens to Jackrabbit when the Apache JCP policy proposal gets voted in and the ASF will no longer accept a JSR-283 TCK? (or is that not the case..?) Day published the JSR 170 TCK under a completely open license. AFAIK (and I should know), Day is going to use the same license for JSR 283. All of the tests for 170 are the same as those used in the Jackrabbit maven build, though some are on the exclusion list by now (meaning other implementations don't have to pass them). And the work products of the EG are all public on java.net. In order to do all that, Day had to develop our own test harness that would not be encumbered by Sun's proprietary harness and NDA, and our own license that would allow self-testing under the official TCK (which can be downloaded for free at www.day.com). You can find that harness in the Jackrabbit subversion as well. Note that you only need the TCK if you are implementing an independent implementation, or if you want to certify a forked version of Jackrabbit. The Apache Jackrabbit release builds are already tested against the TCK. Will this have any negative consequences for the progress of Jackrabbit 2.0? I don't think so. Even if Apache were to completely exit the JCP, David's policy has been to add individuals to the expert group. Roy
