Don't you remember how many tests we challenged/excluded until the TCK was
finally ok?
Well, this is another of those issues - but it got catched only pretty late.
LieGrue,
strub
>________________________________
> From: Gurkan Erdogdu <gurkanerdo...@yahoo.com>
>To: "dev@openwebbeans.apache.org" <dev@openwebbeans.apache.org>; Mark Struberg
><strub...@yahoo.de>
>Sent: Wednesday, April 10, 2013 11:23 AM
>Subject: Yan: CDI 1.0 TCK Problem + validatePassivationDependencies
>
>
>Hi Mark
>
>1.1.8 branch
>
>
>
>Broken means that it is not necessary to pass this in TCK for CDI 1.0, why
>this test exist in TCK?
>
>
>Thks.
>
>
>
>Gurkan
>
>
>
>________________________________
> Kimden: Mark Struberg <strub...@yahoo.de>
>Kime: "dev@openwebbeans.apache.org" <dev@openwebbeans.apache.org>
>Gönderildiği Tarih: 9 Nis 2013 21:47 Salı
>Konu: Re: CDI 1.0 TCK Problem + validatePassivationDependencies
>
>because it's broken!
>It's broken in the CDI-1.0 spec and we clarified the correct behaviour in
>CDI-1.1.
>
>Btw, which branch do you
speak of?
>
>LieGrue,
>strub
>
>
>
>
>----- Original Message -----
>> From: Gurkan Erdogdu <gurkanerdo...@yahoo.com>
>> To: openwebbeans-dev <dev@openwebbeans.apache.org>
>> Cc:
>> Sent: Tuesday, April 9, 2013 11:17 AM
>> Subject: CDI 1.0 TCK Problem + validatePassivationDependencies
>>
>> Hi
>>
>> In AbstractProducerBean below method is commented out but TCK 1.0 still
>> checks
>> ProducerMethod's Serializable return type and fields.
>>
>> public void validatePassivationDependencies()
>> {
>> // don't call super.validatePassivationDependencies()!
>>
// the injection points of producers are the parameters of the
>> producermethod.
>> // since CDI-1.1 we must not check those for is serializable anymore.
>> }
>>
>>
>> In CDI 1.1 this is corrected but TCK 1.0 still check this. Why is this
>> commented
>> out?
>>
>>
>> Gurkan
>>
>
>
>
>
