To my knowledge, no, it is not the same. Actually without accessing TCK suite ( and required to become a licensee of Oracle) , you can not use any test and say that blabla server is compatible. Currently ASF is not licensee of Oracle so no project in ASF can have access to TCK suite.
Best Gurkan Sent from my iPhone > On 14 Oca 2016, at 20:45, Mark Struberg <[email protected]> wrote: > > With other words, most of the other vendor packages are strictly seen also > not ‚certified‘ but only ‚compliant‘. > Which makes them not bad - it’s just that the terms often get mixed up by > marketing (knowingly or not? I don’t know) and confuse users. > > LieGrue, > strub > > >> Am 11.01.2016 um 23:04 schrieb David Blevins <[email protected]>: >> >> Correct and to be clear, there are two distinct words >> >> - Certified = formal acknowledgement from Oracle for passing the Web Profile >> or Full Profile TCK. Oracle offers no other form of certification. >> - Compliant = passes the respective tests or conforms to the related spec. >> >> In the majority of the thread the word “certified” is being used where >> really “compliant” is more appropriate. >> >> Per certification rules, there are just the two profiles (Web and Full). To >> be Web Profile certified by Oracle you have to implement and pass the Web >> Profile technologies and ONLY the Web Profile technologies. If you go one >> inch further and add JAX-WS, JMS or anything else, you cannot call it >> “certified” even if you pass the respective tests. >> >> If we wanted to have a Java EE 6 Web Profile certified version of TomEE 1.x >> that includes EclipseLink and Mojarra, we could do that, but we’d have to >> remove JAX-RS, JAX-WS, and JMS from the box as none of those are in the Web >> Profile. >> >> >> -- >> David Blevins
