Fixed several in my fork - guess it has been merged but there was too much issues to fix them all alone. The build output shows what it is generally - excepted when the tests are not passing at all like angular example was. Le 2 mai 2016 13:11, "John D. Ament" <johndam...@apache.org> a écrit :
> On Mon, May 2, 2016 at 2:44 AM Romain Manni-Bucau <rmannibu...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > Not portable test, jpa on not jpa tests etc. We pass really more tests > > AFAIK. > > > Could you elaborate on that a little? What is not portable? If you want to > raise issues in our ticket system please feel free: > https://github.com/javaee-samples/javaee7-samples/issues > > Or if you want to just say them, I can put them into github. > > > > > Le 2 mai 2016 05:48, "David Blevins" <david.blev...@gmail.com> a écrit : > > > > > No worries on the many posts. Thank you for the Java EE 7 samples > > checkup > > > :) > > > > > > It appears we fail 35% of the JAX-RS 2.0 tests. Do we know what is > > > preventing us from passing those tests? > > > > > > > > > -- > > > David Blevins > > > http://twitter.com/dblevins > > > http://www.tomitribe.com > > > > > > > On May 1, 2016, at 6:42 PM, John D. Ament <johndam...@apache.org> > > wrote: > > > > > > > > Sorry for so many posts :-) > > > > > > > > TomEE Plus 7.0.0-M3 passes 238/338 tests in the suite. > > > > > > > > John > > > > > > > > On Sun, May 1, 2016 at 9:30 PM John D. Ament <johndam...@apache.org> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > >> I ended up changing the version and updating the code. I ran the > > tests, > > > >> you can see the output in this gist: > > > >> https://gist.github.com/johnament/2443e79836605a913159b14295681536 > > > >> > > > >> TomEE Plus fails at about 100 tests. > > > >> > > > >> John > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> On Sun, May 1, 2016 at 8:10 PM John D. Ament <johndam...@apache.org > > > > > >> wrote: > > > >> > > > >>> If it helps any, I can push up the latest TomEE version to the > TomEE > > > >>> profile: > > > >>> > > > > > > https://github.com/javaee-samples/javaee7-samples/blob/master/pom.xml#L690 > > > >>> > > > >>> John > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> On Sun, May 1, 2016 at 8:07 PM David Blevins < > > david.blev...@gmail.com> > > > >>> wrote: > > > >>> > > > >>>> In terms of statements of compliance, which of these Java EE 7 > > samples > > > >>>> will currently run successfully? > > > >>>> > > > >>>> - https://github.com/javaee-samples/javaee7-samples < > > > >>>> https://github.com/javaee-samples/javaee7-samples> > > > >>>> > > > >>>> > > > >>>> -- > > > >>>> David Blevins > > > >>>> http://twitter.com/dblevins > > > >>>> http://www.tomitribe.com > > > >>>> > > > >>>>> On Apr 28, 2016, at 6:19 AM, ross.cohen <ross.cohen...@gmail.com > > > > > >>>> wrote: > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>> Actually, it looks like a 7.0 release means different things to > > > >>>> different > > > >>>>> people. Romain, you took everyone's approval of the idea of a > > 7.0.0 > > > >>>> release > > > >>>>> to be an approval of your particular version of a 7.0.0 release, > > > which > > > >>>> it > > > >>>>> clearly was not. Looks to me like a finer-grained vote is > needed > > to > > > >>>> figure > > > >>>>> out exactly what people want as part of 7.0.0 release. > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>> Personally, I think David is correct in saying that a release > > without > > > >>>> some > > > >>>>> kind of positive JEE 7 compatibility statement is a serious > > mistake. > > > >>>> I know > > > >>>>> the TCK is out of the question right now, but that simply means > you > > > >>>> need to > > > >>>>> invent an alternative compatibility statement: "Apache-Certified > > > >>>> Compliant > > > >>>>> to Web Profile Specifications" (or some such). > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>> -- > > > >>>>> View this message in context: > > > >>>> > > > > > > http://tomee-openejb.979440.n4.nabble.com/7-0-0-release-vote-tp4678284.html > > > >>>>> Sent from the TomEE Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > > > >>>> > > > >>>> > > > > > > > > >
