Re: My experience trying to find TCK failing test so far

[César Hernández Mendoza]

I opened this PR  https://github.com/apache/tomee-tck/pull/9 to:

1) fix a typo in pom.xml
2) rollback to tomee and openejb 8.0.0-snapshot because that facilitates
local debug and testing while trying to fix tests.
3) Removed from ./runtest shellscript the implicit -U flag for mvn. This
was causing a strange behavior when trying to debug locally because even if
you don't provide -U in the ./runtest script, the -U was always implicit
inside the script.

Can someone of the committers please review the PR.

El vie., 8 feb. 2019 a las 17:08, César Hernández Mendoza (<
cesargu...@gmail.com>) escribió:

> I'm having issues trying to debug the failing test described in my
> previous email.
>
> Does TomEE-TCK has a way to debug a specific TomEE version from my
> ~/.m2/repository without downloading TomEE from the internet?
>
> I noticed that the current tomee-tck pom [1] is using version 8.0.0-M2
> for both  and 
> On my local tomee-tck I changed this to 8.0.0-SNAPSHOT, which is the
> version I generate from my local tomee repository using:
>
> mvn -Pquick -Dsurefire.useFile=false -DdisableXmlReport=true
> -DuniqueVersion=false -ff -Dassemble -DskipTests -DfailIfNoTests=false
> clean install
>
> Then on tomee-tck I execute:
> ./runtests -Dhttps.protocols=TLSv1.1,TLSv1.2 --env -nc -c -d -w tomee
> com/sun/ts/tests/ejb30/lite/interceptor/singleton/lifecycle/annotated/Client#aroundConstructInterceptorTest_from_ejbembed
>
> But when I attach successfully the remote debugger in TomEE project, my
> changes are not picked up when the tomee-tck is executing the code that
> fails.
>
> If I rollback the tomee-tck to  8.0.0-M2  for both  and
> , then the TomEE debugger doesn't ignore the tomee classes
> but if I add my changes then there are ignored since tomee-tck is using
> tomee 8.0.0-M2.
>
> I also tried without success to use the -ol and --offline option indicated
> in the ./runtest --help
>
> [1]  https://github.com/apache/tomee-tck/blob/master/pom.xml#L41-L42
>
> El mié., 6 feb. 2019 a las 18:10, César Hernández Mendoza (<
> cesargu...@gmail.com>) escribió:
>
>> Hi,
>> I want to share how I'm now chasing for failing tests for the TomEE TCK
>> execution.
>> This has been a learning jorney from the three proyects: TomEE, tomee-tck
>> and jakartaee-tck.
>>
>>
>> First, a quick question for the list:
>> Can someone from the list can double check if this test also fails on
>> your side and share your tomee-tck/target/logs/javatest.log file?
>> ./runtests -Dhttps.protocols=TLSv1.1,TLSv1.2 --env -nc -c -U -w tomee
>> com/sun/ts/tests/ejb30/lite/interceptor/singleton/lifecycle/annotated/Client#aroundConstructInterceptorTest_from_ejbembed
>>
>>
>>
>> Now proceeding with the details of how I ended up there:
>>
>> The first problem I overcome in the past days is how to identify from
>> the 47,219 tests the ones related with web profile.
>> For this, I created last week a PR that summaries this information and
>> also tomee-tck debug options [1]
>>
>> With the help of the custom filter from the JT Harness filter, I identify
>> the first group of test containing related "javaee_web_profile" tests:
>> [com.sun.ts.tests.ejb30.lite]
>>
>> I proceed to run locally the following command:
>>  ./runtests -Dhttps.protocols=TLSv1.1,TLSv1.2 --env -nc -c -U -w tomee
>> com.sun.ts.tests.ejb30.lite
>>
>> But it took on my laptop about 16 hours oO.
>> I pasted the result on my ejb30/lite sheet [1], there is a filter called
>> "Show Failed" that you can use to filter the results.
>>
>> As you can see from  test 2027 passed and 195 failed. This was
>> interesting because my filter applied on JT harness UI was
>> "javaee_web_profile" over the test packages but because each package can
>> have sub packages, I found that some of the failing tests like: 
>> autoCloseTest_from_ejbembed
>> [3] are not javaee_web_profile tests so you need to be double checking with
>> JT Harnes UI if the failing test is actually web_profile reateld.
>>
>>
>> [1]
>> https://github.com/apache/tomee-tck/pull/8/files#diff-ba2698ef203cf2653a73e80874eefa3dR13
>> [2]
>> https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1oYO0RN-rg4Z7TgSLJ2u4iK4hOFHOXA49ech2y0N3kVw/edit?usp=sharing
>> [3]
>> com/sun/ts/tests/ejb30/lite/packaging/embed/classloader/annotated/Client#java#autoCloseTest_from_ejbembed
>> --
>> Atentamente:
>> César Hernández Mendoza.
>>
>
>
> --
> Atentamente:
> César Hernández Mendoza.
>


-- 
Atentamente:
César Hernández Mendoza.

Re: MicroProfile Integration in Plus and Plume

[Roberto Cortez]

Great! Thanks for the update. Send the PR when ready and I’ll be happy to test 
it and merge it! 

Cheers,
Roberto

> On 11 Feb 2019, at 14:16, j4fm  wrote:
> 
> Hey Roberto, progress so far... the JAX-RS issue you referenced a few
> messages ago was solved with my filter enhancement.  But actually found it
> was having the reverse affect for some requests (as in it was passing them
> down the chain when they were valid CXF requests - this was just about
> matching the right path value).  I've solved that now too.
> 
> Back to running the lengthy tests now.  I will update the PR as soon as
> everything looks good locally.
> 
> 
> 
> --
> Sent from: http://tomee-openejb.979440.n4.nabble.com/TomEE-Dev-f982480.html

Re: Examples Missing README Files

[Bogdan Stirbat]

Hi,

Thank you. I don't have the permission to update the assignee, so I ask a
JIRA admin to assign ticket https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TOMEE-2393
to me (username: Bogdan Stirbat).

Thanks,
Bogdan


În lun., 11 feb. 2019 la 17:12, César Hernández Mendoza <
cesargu...@gmail.com> a scris:

> Thank you Bogdan,
>
> I reviewed +1 TOMEE-2372, can some of the committers please move forward
> this PR and it's corresponding JIRA.
>
>
>
> > Can I pick https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TOMEE-2393 ?
>
> Sure, go ahead.
> If you don't have JIRA permission to update the assignee, can som of the
> JIRA admins please assign the ticke to username: Bogdan Stirbat
>
> El sáb., 9 feb. 2019 a las 9:07, Bogdan Stirbat ( >)
> escribió:
>
> > Hi!
> >
> > For https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TOMEE-2372 I've added a new
> pull
> > request: https://github.com/apache/tomee/pull/392 .
> >
> > Can I pick https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TOMEE-2393 ?
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Bogdan
> >
> >
> > În vin., 8 feb. 2019 la 19:55, Bruno Baptista  a
> > scris:
> >
> > > Hi Bogdan,
> > >
> > > I've reviewed your PR and it looks good to go:
> > > https://github.com/apache/tomee/pull/383
> > >
> > > Thanks very much!
> > >
> > > Bruno Baptista
> > > https://twitter.com/brunobat_
> > >
> > >
> > > On 03/02/19 19:17, Bogdan Stirbat wrote:
> > > > Ok, thank you!
> > > >
> > > > Bogdan
> > > >
> > > > În dum., 3 feb. 2019 la 04:02, Roberto Cortez
> > > 
> > > > a scris:
> > > >
> > > >> Thank your for your PR. I’ll have a look later.
> > > >>
> > > >> Sure. I’ve assigned the issue to you.
> > > >>
> > > >> Cheers,
> > > >> Roberto
> > > >>
> > > >>> On 2 Feb 2019, at 14:49, Bogdan Stirbat 
> > > >> wrote:
> > > >>> Hi,
> > > >>>
> > > >>> For the issue https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TOMEE-2375
> I've
> > > >> added a
> > > >>> pull request, https://github.com/apache/tomee/pull/383.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Can I work on https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TOMEE-2372?
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Thanks,
> > > >>> Bogdan
> > > >>>
> > > >>>
> > > >>> În joi, 31 ian. 2019 la 17:28, Roberto Cortez
> > > >> 
> > > >>> a scris:
> > > >>>
> > >  Hi Bogdan and César,
> > > 
> > >  Thank you for your availability. I’ve the tickets to the both of
> > you.
> > > 
> > >  Cheers,
> > >  Roberto
> > > 
> > > > On 31 Jan 2019, at 15:18, César Hernández Mendoza <
> > > >> cesargu...@gmail.com>
> > >  wrote:
> > > > Thanks for the email Roberto,
> > > >
> > > > I can take https://jira.apache.org/jira/browse/TOMEE-2377, can
> > some
> > > of
> > >  the
> > > > JIRA admins proceed to assign it to me, please.
> > > >
> > > > El mié., 30 ene. 2019 a las 13:20, Bogdan Stirbat (<
> > >  bogdan.stir...@gmail.com>)
> > > > escribió:
> > > >
> > > >> Hi,
> > > >>
> > > >> Can I pick https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TOMEE-2375 ?
> > > >>
> > > >> Thanks,
> > > >> Bogdan
> > > >>
> > > >> În mie., 30 ian. 2019 la 17:43, Roberto Cortez
> > >   > > >> a scris:
> > > >>
> > > >>> Hi folks,
> > > >>>
> > > >>> I was wondering if someone (maybe even more than 1 person),
> would
> > > >> like
> > >  to
> > > >>> pick subtasks of this JIRA:
> > > >>> https://jira.apache.org/jira/browse/TOMEE-2369 <
> > > >>> https://jira.apache.org/jira/browse/TOMEE-2369>
> > > >>>
> > > >>> And start adding README files to the example projects that are
> > > >> missing
> > > >>> them?
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Cheers,
> > > >>> Roberto
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Atentamente:
> > > > César Hernández Mendoza.
> > > 
> > > >>
> > >
> >
>
>
> --
> Atentamente:
> César Hernández Mendoza.
>

Re: "In" parameter not being populated OpenAPI

[Romain Manni-Bucau]

Then just upgrade?
About the "not needed", it depends but not an issue by itself AFAIK.

Le lun. 11 févr. 2019 à 17:37, Ivan Junckes Filho  a
écrit :

> This is how it is showing up in components, schemas. But with a lot of not
> needed properties as  this class has only telefone, mensagem and usuario.
>
>  "br_com_gbrsistemas_crvirtual_sms_Sms": {
> "deprecated": false,
> "exclusiveMaximum": false,
> "exclusiveMinimum": false,
> "maxLength": 2147483647,
> "minLength": 0,
> "nullable": false,
> "properties": {
>   "telefone": {
> "type": "string"
>   },
>   "mensagem": {
> "type": "string"
>   },
>   "usuario": {
> "type": "string"
>   }
> },
> "readOnly": false,
> "type": "object",
> "uniqueItems": false,
> "writeOnly": false
>   },
>
> Also the SNAPSHOT service path references the previous schema also with a
> lot of not needed properties like deprecated, etc.
>
> /sms/enviar": {
>   "post": {
> "deprecated": false,
> "description": "Enviar SMS.",
> "operationId": "enviarSms",
> "parameters": [
>
> ],
> "requestBody": {
>   "content": {
> "*/*": {
>   "schema": {
> "$ref":
> "#/components/schemas/br_com_gbrsistemas_crvirtual_sms_Sms",
> "deprecated": false,
> "exclusiveMaximum": false,
> "exclusiveMinimum": false,
> "maxLength": 2147483647,
> "minLength": 0,
> "nullable": false,
> "readOnly": false,
> "type": "object",
> "uniqueItems": false,
> "writeOnly": false
>   }
> }
>   },
>   "required": false
> },
> "responses": {
>   "200": {
> "content": {
>   "text/plain": {
> "schema": {
>   "deprecated": false,
>   "exclusiveMaximum": false,
>   "exclusiveMinimum": false,
>   "maxLength": 2147483647,
>   "minLength": 0,
>   "nullable": false,
>   "readOnly": false,
>   "type": "string",
>   "uniqueItems": false,
>   "writeOnly": false
> }
>   }
> },
> "description": "Success"
>   },
>   "400": {
> "content": {
>   "200": {
>
>   }
> },
> "description": "Bad Request"
>   }
> },
> "security": [
>   {
> "bearer": [
>
> ]
>   }
> ]
>   }
> },
>
> The current m2 version of TomEE doesn't even show ref or any schema
> classes.
>
> On Mon, Feb 11, 2019 at 12:12 PM Romain Manni-Bucau 
> wrote:
>
>> Hi Ivan, no the mapping can need some polishing to become mainstream
>> (cause it is not openapi role to reimplement all mappers logic) but the
>> annotation mapping is done.
>> This one can depend the companions this annotation has, some will imply
>> it gets ignored but AFAIK TCK test that and we pass them.
>>
>> Romain Manni-Bucau
>> @rmannibucau  |  Blog
>>  | Old Blog
>>  | Github
>>  | LinkedIn
>>  | Book
>> 
>>
>>
>> Le lun. 11 févr. 2019 à 14:56, Ivan Junckes Filho 
>> a écrit :
>>
>>> One thing I saw happening too, is when I add the annotation below it
>>> doesn't get added to openapi.
>>>
>>> @RequestBody(content = @Content(schema = @Schema(implementation = 
>>> Sms.class)))
>>>
>>>
>>> Is that because it is under development?
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, Feb 11, 2019 at 11:38 AM Romain Manni-Bucau <
>>> rmannibu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
 Yes Ivan, array mapping is in progress. In the meantime you can define
 your schema to ensure you control it and the implicit representation does
 not depends on the way the impl parses it - which can not match your
 underlying mapper.

 Romain Manni-Bucau
 @rmannibucau  |  Blog
  | Old Blog
  | Github
  | LinkedIn
  | Book
 


 Le lun. 11 févr. 2019 à 14:23, Ivan Junckes Filho <
 ivanjunc...@gmail.com> a écrit :

> Looks like it is fixed in the master, but when I get the lib and add
> to tomee it shows some bad behavio

Re: "In" parameter not being populated OpenAPI

[Ivan Junckes Filho]

This is how it is showing up in components, schemas. But with a lot of not
needed properties as  this class has only telefone, mensagem and usuario.

 "br_com_gbrsistemas_crvirtual_sms_Sms": {
"deprecated": false,
"exclusiveMaximum": false,
"exclusiveMinimum": false,
"maxLength": 2147483647,
"minLength": 0,
"nullable": false,
"properties": {
  "telefone": {
"type": "string"
  },
  "mensagem": {
"type": "string"
  },
  "usuario": {
"type": "string"
  }
},
"readOnly": false,
"type": "object",
"uniqueItems": false,
"writeOnly": false
  },

Also the SNAPSHOT service path references the previous schema also with a
lot of not needed properties like deprecated, etc.

/sms/enviar": {
  "post": {
"deprecated": false,
"description": "Enviar SMS.",
"operationId": "enviarSms",
"parameters": [

],
"requestBody": {
  "content": {
"*/*": {
  "schema": {
"$ref":
"#/components/schemas/br_com_gbrsistemas_crvirtual_sms_Sms",
"deprecated": false,
"exclusiveMaximum": false,
"exclusiveMinimum": false,
"maxLength": 2147483647,
"minLength": 0,
"nullable": false,
"readOnly": false,
"type": "object",
"uniqueItems": false,
"writeOnly": false
  }
}
  },
  "required": false
},
"responses": {
  "200": {
"content": {
  "text/plain": {
"schema": {
  "deprecated": false,
  "exclusiveMaximum": false,
  "exclusiveMinimum": false,
  "maxLength": 2147483647,
  "minLength": 0,
  "nullable": false,
  "readOnly": false,
  "type": "string",
  "uniqueItems": false,
  "writeOnly": false
}
  }
},
"description": "Success"
  },
  "400": {
"content": {
  "200": {

  }
},
"description": "Bad Request"
  }
},
"security": [
  {
"bearer": [

]
  }
]
  }
},

The current m2 version of TomEE doesn't even show ref or any schema classes.

On Mon, Feb 11, 2019 at 12:12 PM Romain Manni-Bucau 
wrote:

> Hi Ivan, no the mapping can need some polishing to become mainstream
> (cause it is not openapi role to reimplement all mappers logic) but the
> annotation mapping is done.
> This one can depend the companions this annotation has, some will imply it
> gets ignored but AFAIK TCK test that and we pass them.
>
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> @rmannibucau  |  Blog
>  | Old Blog
>  | Github
>  | LinkedIn
>  | Book
> 
>
>
> Le lun. 11 févr. 2019 à 14:56, Ivan Junckes Filho 
> a écrit :
>
>> One thing I saw happening too, is when I add the annotation below it
>> doesn't get added to openapi.
>>
>> @RequestBody(content = @Content(schema = @Schema(implementation = 
>> Sms.class)))
>>
>>
>> Is that because it is under development?
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Feb 11, 2019 at 11:38 AM Romain Manni-Bucau <
>> rmannibu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Yes Ivan, array mapping is in progress. In the meantime you can define
>>> your schema to ensure you control it and the implicit representation does
>>> not depends on the way the impl parses it - which can not match your
>>> underlying mapper.
>>>
>>> Romain Manni-Bucau
>>> @rmannibucau  |  Blog
>>>  | Old Blog
>>>  | Github
>>>  | LinkedIn
>>>  | Book
>>> 
>>>
>>>
>>> Le lun. 11 févr. 2019 à 14:23, Ivan Junckes Filho 
>>> a écrit :
>>>
 Looks like it is fixed in the master, but when I get the lib and add to
 tomee it shows some bad behavior with the schemas.

 [image: image.png]

 On Mon, Feb 11, 2019 at 11:09 AM Ivan Junckes Filho <
 ivanjunc...@gmail.com> wrote:

> No I didn't, I will have a look. thanks
>
> On Mon, Feb 11, 2019 at 11:08 AM Romain Manni-Bucau <
> rmannibu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi Ivan,
>>
>> Did you test on the snapshot? we got some enhancements about it.
>>
>> Romain M

Re: Examples Missing README Files

[César Hernández Mendoza]

Thank you Bogdan,

I reviewed +1 TOMEE-2372, can some of the committers please move forward
this PR and it's corresponding JIRA.



> Can I pick https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TOMEE-2393 ?

Sure, go ahead.
If you don't have JIRA permission to update the assignee, can som of the
JIRA admins please assign the ticke to username: Bogdan Stirbat

El sáb., 9 feb. 2019 a las 9:07, Bogdan Stirbat ()
escribió:

> Hi!
>
> For https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TOMEE-2372 I've added a new pull
> request: https://github.com/apache/tomee/pull/392 .
>
> Can I pick https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TOMEE-2393 ?
>
> Thanks,
> Bogdan
>
>
> În vin., 8 feb. 2019 la 19:55, Bruno Baptista  a
> scris:
>
> > Hi Bogdan,
> >
> > I've reviewed your PR and it looks good to go:
> > https://github.com/apache/tomee/pull/383
> >
> > Thanks very much!
> >
> > Bruno Baptista
> > https://twitter.com/brunobat_
> >
> >
> > On 03/02/19 19:17, Bogdan Stirbat wrote:
> > > Ok, thank you!
> > >
> > > Bogdan
> > >
> > > În dum., 3 feb. 2019 la 04:02, Roberto Cortez
> > 
> > > a scris:
> > >
> > >> Thank your for your PR. I’ll have a look later.
> > >>
> > >> Sure. I’ve assigned the issue to you.
> > >>
> > >> Cheers,
> > >> Roberto
> > >>
> > >>> On 2 Feb 2019, at 14:49, Bogdan Stirbat 
> > >> wrote:
> > >>> Hi,
> > >>>
> > >>> For the issue https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TOMEE-2375 I've
> > >> added a
> > >>> pull request, https://github.com/apache/tomee/pull/383.
> > >>>
> > >>> Can I work on https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TOMEE-2372?
> > >>>
> > >>> Thanks,
> > >>> Bogdan
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> În joi, 31 ian. 2019 la 17:28, Roberto Cortez
> > >> 
> > >>> a scris:
> > >>>
> >  Hi Bogdan and César,
> > 
> >  Thank you for your availability. I’ve the tickets to the both of
> you.
> > 
> >  Cheers,
> >  Roberto
> > 
> > > On 31 Jan 2019, at 15:18, César Hernández Mendoza <
> > >> cesargu...@gmail.com>
> >  wrote:
> > > Thanks for the email Roberto,
> > >
> > > I can take https://jira.apache.org/jira/browse/TOMEE-2377, can
> some
> > of
> >  the
> > > JIRA admins proceed to assign it to me, please.
> > >
> > > El mié., 30 ene. 2019 a las 13:20, Bogdan Stirbat (<
> >  bogdan.stir...@gmail.com>)
> > > escribió:
> > >
> > >> Hi,
> > >>
> > >> Can I pick https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TOMEE-2375 ?
> > >>
> > >> Thanks,
> > >> Bogdan
> > >>
> > >> În mie., 30 ian. 2019 la 17:43, Roberto Cortez
> >   > >> a scris:
> > >>
> > >>> Hi folks,
> > >>>
> > >>> I was wondering if someone (maybe even more than 1 person), would
> > >> like
> >  to
> > >>> pick subtasks of this JIRA:
> > >>> https://jira.apache.org/jira/browse/TOMEE-2369 <
> > >>> https://jira.apache.org/jira/browse/TOMEE-2369>
> > >>>
> > >>> And start adding README files to the example projects that are
> > >> missing
> > >>> them?
> > >>>
> > >>> Cheers,
> > >>> Roberto
> > >
> > > --
> > > Atentamente:
> > > César Hernández Mendoza.
> > 
> > >>
> >
>


-- 
Atentamente:
César Hernández Mendoza.

Re: How can I help?

[César Hernández Mendoza]

Thank you Salomon,
+1, I reviewed the PR.

Can some of the committers please move forward this PR and corresponding
JIRA ticket.

El vie., 8 feb. 2019 a las 15:48, Salomon ()
escribió:

> Hi guys,
> I just added PR https://github.com/apache/tomee/pull/391 for
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TOMEE-2402
>
> Le ven. 8 févr. 2019 à 16:37, Jonathan Gallimore <
> jonathan.gallim...@gmail.com> a écrit :
>
> > > Can someone from the JIRA admins please assign TOMEE-2402 to username:
> > mayens  please.
> >
> > Also done.
> >
> > Cheers
> >
> > Jon
> >
> > On Thu, Feb 7, 2019 at 9:35 PM Salomon  wrote:
> >
> >> fyi
> >> -- Forwarded message -
> >> From: César Hernández Mendoza 
> >> Date: jeu. 7 févr. 2019 à 22:17
> >> Subject: Re: How can I help?
> >> To: 
> >>
> >>
> >> @JiraAdmins
> >> Can someone from the JIRA admins please assign TOMEE-2402 to username:
> >> mayens  please.
> >>
> >> @Salomon
> >> The general Contributors workflow and tips check out this link:
> >> http://tomee.apache.org/community/index.html
> >>
> >> For the Readme file task, I would suggest starting by making sure the
> >> example run smoothly by:
> >> $cd examples/webservice-ws-with-resources-config/
> >> $ mvn test
> >>
> >> From there you can study the code and provide in the readme file the
> >> information that will allow the reader to understand the learning topic
> >> and
> >> also how to run it.
> >> Take as reference:
> >>
> http://tomee.apache.org/tomee-8.0/examples/mp-faulttolerance-fallback.html
> >> Some examples use Arquillian but this is not the case for TOMEE-2402  so
> >> the readme file will be straight forward to the learning topic.
> >>
> >> About TomEE-2465 I don't have the answer so my suggestion is for you to
> >> open another email thread to gather feedback about it.
> >>
> >> Thanks and feel free to reach back to the list if you have any question!
> >>
> >> El jue., 7 feb. 2019 a las 14:57, Salomon ()
> >> escribió:
> >>
> >> > Hi César,
> >> > Thanks for your quick reply,
> >> > I would like to start with the creation of missing README files. Let
> say
> >> > this : https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TOMEE-2402
> >> > I also created this ticket :
> >> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TOMEE-2465
> >> >
> >> > Please let me know where to start.
> >> > Thanks
> >> > Salomon
> >> >
> >> > Le jeu. 7 févr. 2019 à 21:45, César Hernández Mendoza <
> >> > cesargu...@gmail.com> a écrit :
> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >> Welcome to the dev list Salomon!.
> >> >>
> >> >> We currently have a couple of Epics targeted for new contributors,
> >> >> please check for instance:
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>- We are just ramping up the TCK process for TomEE:
> >> >>https://github.com/apache/tomee-tck/
> >> >>- Generation of Micro Profile examples:
> >> >>https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TOMEE-2285
> >> >>- Improving documentation by the creation of missing README files
> in
> >> >>TomEE examples: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TOMEE-2369
> >> >>- Translation into other languages the examples. This is the one
> for
> >> >>Spanish but feel free to create the Main Task for another
> language:
> >> >>https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TOMEE-2442
> >> >>
> >> >> If you have some other Idea or you come up with a question just shout
> >> in
> >> >> the list!
> >> >>
> >> >> El jue., 7 feb. 2019 a las 14:26, Salomon ( >)
> >> >> escribió:
> >> >>
> >> >>> Hello,
> >> >>>
> >> >>> I'm Salomon Mayengue, I'm Full-Stack JEE guy who lives in Annemasse
> (a
> >> >>> small city in FRANCE near to Geneva).
> >> >>> I started to use TomEE as application server last year and I really
> >> want
> >> >>> to
> >> >>> bring my contribution to help the
> >> >>> project and the community to grow and to learn in deep the product
> :).
> >> >>> Please let me know how can I help.
> >> >>> Thanks
> >> >>> Salomon Mayengue
> >> >>>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> --
> >> >> Atentamente:
> >> >> César Hernández Mendoza.
> >> >>
> >> >
> >>
> >> --
> >> Atentamente:
> >> César Hernández Mendoza.
> >>
> >
>


-- 
Atentamente:
César Hernández Mendoza.

Re: MicroProfile Integration in Plus and Plume

[j4fm]

Hey Roberto, progress so far... the JAX-RS issue you referenced a few
messages ago was solved with my filter enhancement.  But actually found it
was having the reverse affect for some requests (as in it was passing them
down the chain when they were valid CXF requests - this was just about
matching the right path value).  I've solved that now too.

Back to running the lengthy tests now.  I will update the PR as soon as
everything looks good locally.



--
Sent from: http://tomee-openejb.979440.n4.nabble.com/TomEE-Dev-f982480.html

Re: "In" parameter not being populated OpenAPI

[Romain Manni-Bucau]

Hi Ivan, no the mapping can need some polishing to become mainstream (cause
it is not openapi role to reimplement all mappers logic) but the annotation
mapping is done.
This one can depend the companions this annotation has, some will imply it
gets ignored but AFAIK TCK test that and we pass them.

Romain Manni-Bucau
@rmannibucau  |  Blog
 | Old Blog
 | Github  |
LinkedIn  | Book



Le lun. 11 févr. 2019 à 14:56, Ivan Junckes Filho  a
écrit :

> One thing I saw happening too, is when I add the annotation below it
> doesn't get added to openapi.
>
> @RequestBody(content = @Content(schema = @Schema(implementation = Sms.class)))
>
>
> Is that because it is under development?
>
>
> On Mon, Feb 11, 2019 at 11:38 AM Romain Manni-Bucau 
> wrote:
>
>> Yes Ivan, array mapping is in progress. In the meantime you can define
>> your schema to ensure you control it and the implicit representation does
>> not depends on the way the impl parses it - which can not match your
>> underlying mapper.
>>
>> Romain Manni-Bucau
>> @rmannibucau  |  Blog
>>  | Old Blog
>>  | Github
>>  | LinkedIn
>>  | Book
>> 
>>
>>
>> Le lun. 11 févr. 2019 à 14:23, Ivan Junckes Filho 
>> a écrit :
>>
>>> Looks like it is fixed in the master, but when I get the lib and add to
>>> tomee it shows some bad behavior with the schemas.
>>>
>>> [image: image.png]
>>>
>>> On Mon, Feb 11, 2019 at 11:09 AM Ivan Junckes Filho <
>>> ivanjunc...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
 No I didn't, I will have a look. thanks

 On Mon, Feb 11, 2019 at 11:08 AM Romain Manni-Bucau <
 rmannibu...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi Ivan,
>
> Did you test on the snapshot? we got some enhancements about it.
>
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> @rmannibucau  |  Blog
>  | Old Blog
>  | Github <
> https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
> LinkedIn  | Book
> <
> https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance
> >
>
>
> Le lun. 11 févr. 2019 à 14:03, Ivan Junckes Filho <
> ivanjunc...@gmail.com> a
> écrit :
>
> > Hey guys, I think there is an issue with parameters as the "in"
> property
> > is required by the spec and is not showing up. This affects
> swagger-ui as
> > it doesn't replace uf by the actual value. Anyone aware of this
> issue?
> >
> > {
> >   "openapi": "3.0.1",
> >   "paths": {
> > "/test/{uf}": {
> >   "get": {
> > "deprecated": false,
> > "description": "Test by UF.",
> > "operationId": "test",
> > "parameters": [
> >   {
> > "name": "uf",
> > "required": true,
> > "schema": {
> >   "type": "string"
> > },
> > "style": "simple"
> >   }
> > ],
> > "responses": {
> >   "200": {
> > "content": {
> >   "application/json": {
> > "schema": {
> >   "deprecated": false,
> >   "exclusiveMaximum": false,
> >   "exclusiveMinimum": false,
> >   "items": {
> >
> >   },
> >   "maxLength": 2147483647,
> >   "minLength": 0,
> >   "nullable": false,
> >   "properties": {
> >
> >   },
> >   "readOnly": false,
> >   "uniqueItems": false,
> >   "writeOnly": false
> > }
> >   }
> > },
> > "description": "Success"
> >   },
> >   "400": {
> > "content": {
> >   "200": {
> >
> >   }
> > },
> > "description": "Bad Request"
> >   }
> > },
> >
> >   }
> > },
> >
> >   }
> >   ]
> > }
> >
>

Re: "In" parameter not being populated OpenAPI

[Romain Manni-Bucau]

Yes Ivan, array mapping is in progress. In the meantime you can define your
schema to ensure you control it and the implicit representation does not
depends on the way the impl parses it - which can not match your underlying
mapper.

Romain Manni-Bucau
@rmannibucau  |  Blog
 | Old Blog
 | Github  |
LinkedIn  | Book



Le lun. 11 févr. 2019 à 14:23, Ivan Junckes Filho  a
écrit :

> Looks like it is fixed in the master, but when I get the lib and add to
> tomee it shows some bad behavior with the schemas.
>
> [image: image.png]
>
> On Mon, Feb 11, 2019 at 11:09 AM Ivan Junckes Filho 
> wrote:
>
>> No I didn't, I will have a look. thanks
>>
>> On Mon, Feb 11, 2019 at 11:08 AM Romain Manni-Bucau <
>> rmannibu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Ivan,
>>>
>>> Did you test on the snapshot? we got some enhancements about it.
>>>
>>> Romain Manni-Bucau
>>> @rmannibucau  |  Blog
>>>  | Old Blog
>>>  | Github <
>>> https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
>>> LinkedIn  | Book
>>> <
>>> https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance
>>> >
>>>
>>>
>>> Le lun. 11 févr. 2019 à 14:03, Ivan Junckes Filho 
>>> a
>>> écrit :
>>>
>>> > Hey guys, I think there is an issue with parameters as the "in"
>>> property
>>> > is required by the spec and is not showing up. This affects swagger-ui
>>> as
>>> > it doesn't replace uf by the actual value. Anyone aware of this issue?
>>> >
>>> > {
>>> >   "openapi": "3.0.1",
>>> >   "paths": {
>>> > "/test/{uf}": {
>>> >   "get": {
>>> > "deprecated": false,
>>> > "description": "Test by UF.",
>>> > "operationId": "test",
>>> > "parameters": [
>>> >   {
>>> > "name": "uf",
>>> > "required": true,
>>> > "schema": {
>>> >   "type": "string"
>>> > },
>>> > "style": "simple"
>>> >   }
>>> > ],
>>> > "responses": {
>>> >   "200": {
>>> > "content": {
>>> >   "application/json": {
>>> > "schema": {
>>> >   "deprecated": false,
>>> >   "exclusiveMaximum": false,
>>> >   "exclusiveMinimum": false,
>>> >   "items": {
>>> >
>>> >   },
>>> >   "maxLength": 2147483647,
>>> >   "minLength": 0,
>>> >   "nullable": false,
>>> >   "properties": {
>>> >
>>> >   },
>>> >   "readOnly": false,
>>> >   "uniqueItems": false,
>>> >   "writeOnly": false
>>> > }
>>> >   }
>>> > },
>>> > "description": "Success"
>>> >   },
>>> >   "400": {
>>> > "content": {
>>> >   "200": {
>>> >
>>> >   }
>>> > },
>>> > "description": "Bad Request"
>>> >   }
>>> > },
>>> >
>>> >   }
>>> > },
>>> >
>>> >   }
>>> >   ]
>>> > }
>>> >
>>>
>>

Re: "In" parameter not being populated OpenAPI

[Ivan Junckes Filho]

One thing I saw happening too, is when I add the annotation below it
doesn't get added to openapi.

@RequestBody(content = @Content(schema = @Schema(implementation = Sms.class)))


Is that because it is under development?


On Mon, Feb 11, 2019 at 11:38 AM Romain Manni-Bucau 
wrote:

> Yes Ivan, array mapping is in progress. In the meantime you can define
> your schema to ensure you control it and the implicit representation does
> not depends on the way the impl parses it - which can not match your
> underlying mapper.
>
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> @rmannibucau  |  Blog
>  | Old Blog
>  | Github
>  | LinkedIn
>  | Book
> 
>
>
> Le lun. 11 févr. 2019 à 14:23, Ivan Junckes Filho 
> a écrit :
>
>> Looks like it is fixed in the master, but when I get the lib and add to
>> tomee it shows some bad behavior with the schemas.
>>
>> [image: image.png]
>>
>> On Mon, Feb 11, 2019 at 11:09 AM Ivan Junckes Filho <
>> ivanjunc...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> No I didn't, I will have a look. thanks
>>>
>>> On Mon, Feb 11, 2019 at 11:08 AM Romain Manni-Bucau <
>>> rmannibu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
 Hi Ivan,

 Did you test on the snapshot? we got some enhancements about it.

 Romain Manni-Bucau
 @rmannibucau  |  Blog
  | Old Blog
  | Github <
 https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
 LinkedIn  | Book
 <
 https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance
 >


 Le lun. 11 févr. 2019 à 14:03, Ivan Junckes Filho <
 ivanjunc...@gmail.com> a
 écrit :

 > Hey guys, I think there is an issue with parameters as the "in"
 property
 > is required by the spec and is not showing up. This affects
 swagger-ui as
 > it doesn't replace uf by the actual value. Anyone aware of this issue?
 >
 > {
 >   "openapi": "3.0.1",
 >   "paths": {
 > "/test/{uf}": {
 >   "get": {
 > "deprecated": false,
 > "description": "Test by UF.",
 > "operationId": "test",
 > "parameters": [
 >   {
 > "name": "uf",
 > "required": true,
 > "schema": {
 >   "type": "string"
 > },
 > "style": "simple"
 >   }
 > ],
 > "responses": {
 >   "200": {
 > "content": {
 >   "application/json": {
 > "schema": {
 >   "deprecated": false,
 >   "exclusiveMaximum": false,
 >   "exclusiveMinimum": false,
 >   "items": {
 >
 >   },
 >   "maxLength": 2147483647,
 >   "minLength": 0,
 >   "nullable": false,
 >   "properties": {
 >
 >   },
 >   "readOnly": false,
 >   "uniqueItems": false,
 >   "writeOnly": false
 > }
 >   }
 > },
 > "description": "Success"
 >   },
 >   "400": {
 > "content": {
 >   "200": {
 >
 >   }
 > },
 > "description": "Bad Request"
 >   }
 > },
 >
 >   }
 > },
 >
 >   }
 >   ]
 > }
 >

>>>

Re: "In" parameter not being populated OpenAPI

[Ivan Junckes Filho]

Looks like it is fixed in the master, but when I get the lib and add to
tomee it shows some bad behavior with the schemas.

[image: image.png]

On Mon, Feb 11, 2019 at 11:09 AM Ivan Junckes Filho 
wrote:

> No I didn't, I will have a look. thanks
>
> On Mon, Feb 11, 2019 at 11:08 AM Romain Manni-Bucau 
> wrote:
>
>> Hi Ivan,
>>
>> Did you test on the snapshot? we got some enhancements about it.
>>
>> Romain Manni-Bucau
>> @rmannibucau  |  Blog
>>  | Old Blog
>>  | Github <
>> https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
>> LinkedIn  | Book
>> <
>> https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance
>> >
>>
>>
>> Le lun. 11 févr. 2019 à 14:03, Ivan Junckes Filho 
>> a
>> écrit :
>>
>> > Hey guys, I think there is an issue with parameters as the "in" property
>> > is required by the spec and is not showing up. This affects swagger-ui
>> as
>> > it doesn't replace uf by the actual value. Anyone aware of this issue?
>> >
>> > {
>> >   "openapi": "3.0.1",
>> >   "paths": {
>> > "/test/{uf}": {
>> >   "get": {
>> > "deprecated": false,
>> > "description": "Test by UF.",
>> > "operationId": "test",
>> > "parameters": [
>> >   {
>> > "name": "uf",
>> > "required": true,
>> > "schema": {
>> >   "type": "string"
>> > },
>> > "style": "simple"
>> >   }
>> > ],
>> > "responses": {
>> >   "200": {
>> > "content": {
>> >   "application/json": {
>> > "schema": {
>> >   "deprecated": false,
>> >   "exclusiveMaximum": false,
>> >   "exclusiveMinimum": false,
>> >   "items": {
>> >
>> >   },
>> >   "maxLength": 2147483647,
>> >   "minLength": 0,
>> >   "nullable": false,
>> >   "properties": {
>> >
>> >   },
>> >   "readOnly": false,
>> >   "uniqueItems": false,
>> >   "writeOnly": false
>> > }
>> >   }
>> > },
>> > "description": "Success"
>> >   },
>> >   "400": {
>> > "content": {
>> >   "200": {
>> >
>> >   }
>> > },
>> > "description": "Bad Request"
>> >   }
>> > },
>> >
>> >   }
>> > },
>> >
>> >   }
>> >   ]
>> > }
>> >
>>
>

Re: @OpenAPIDefinition not working

[Ivan Junckes Filho]

It didn't seem to work for me adding the property to system.properties. Any
ideas what I am doing wrong?

On Sat, Feb 9, 2019 at 10:21 AM Roberto Cortez  wrote:

> Hi Ivan,
>
> Yes Romain is right, you should set openejb.cxf-rs.cache-application =
> false and it should work. We had to set that for the TCK to pass, but the
> config never reached the final distribution. I did notice that and I’ve
> added it in case a MP app is detected, but it was after M2 was released.
>
> Cheers,
> Roberto
>
> On 8 Feb 2019, at 21:06, Ivan Junckes Filho  wrote:
>
> I will take a look thanks again Romain
>
> On Fri, Feb 8, 2019 at 4:38 PM Romain Manni-Bucau 
> wrote:
>
>> Hey, just recalled we had a flag about it,
>>
>> you can skip it setting openejb.cxf-rs.cache-application=false
>>
>> Romain Manni-Bucau
>> @rmannibucau  |  Blog
>>  | Old Blog
>>  | Github <
>> https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
>> LinkedIn  | Book
>> <
>> https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance
>> >
>>
>>
>> Le ven. 8 févr. 2019 à 19:01, Ivan Junckes Filho 
>> a
>> écrit :
>>
>> > Interesting, ok thanks Romain.
>> >
>> > On Fri, Feb 8, 2019 at 3:29 PM Romain Manni-Bucau <
>> rmannibu...@gmail.com>
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> >> Hi Ivan,
>> >>
>> >> In a few cases - don't recall out of my head if it is all - TomEE wraps
>> >> user application in InternalApplication. IIRC it was for caching
>> reason -
>> >> TomEE not being super cleanly aligned on CDI + to avoid to get multiple
>> >> instances between runtime and deployment which can break user code.
>> >> Enhancing TomEE to no do it anymore or not use a wrapper when not
>> needed
>> >> can be a first step fixing that.
>> >>
>> >> Romain Manni-Bucau
>> >> @rmannibucau  |  Blog
>> >>  | Old Blog
>> >>  | Github
>> >>  | LinkedIn
>> >>  | Book
>> >> <
>> https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance
>> >
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Le ven. 8 févr. 2019 à 18:14, Ivan Junckes Filho <
>> ivanjunc...@gmail.com>
>> >> a écrit :
>> >>
>> >>> The @OpenAPIDefinition is not being picked up by the CDI extension
>> >>> because it is only getting InternalApplication instead of picking up
>> my
>> >>> custom Application config. Any ideas why? OpenAPIDefinition configs
>> are
>> >>> therefore not showing up in the openapi doc.
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> @OpenAPIDefinition(info =
>> >>> @Info(
>> >>> title = "TEST",
>> >>> version = "2.0",
>> >>> description = "Pet Store App API",
>> >>> license = @License(
>> >>> name = "Apache 2.0",
>> >>> url = "
>> http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0.html";),
>> >>> contact = @Contact(
>> >>> name = "PetStore API Support",
>> >>> url = "
>> https://github.com/eclipse/microprofile-open-api";,
>> >>> email = "supp...@petstore.com")
>> >>> ),
>> >>> security = @SecurityRequirement(name = "oauth2"),
>> >>> servers = @Server(url = "/test/"))
>> >>> @ApplicationPath("/api")
>> >>> @LoginConfig(authMethod = "MP-JWT")
>> >>> public class ApplicationConfiguration extends Application {
>> >>>
>> >>>
>>
>
>

Re: "In" parameter not being populated OpenAPI

[Ivan Junckes Filho]

No I didn't, I will have a look. thanks

On Mon, Feb 11, 2019 at 11:08 AM Romain Manni-Bucau 
wrote:

> Hi Ivan,
>
> Did you test on the snapshot? we got some enhancements about it.
>
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> @rmannibucau  |  Blog
>  | Old Blog
>  | Github <
> https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
> LinkedIn  | Book
> <
> https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance
> >
>
>
> Le lun. 11 févr. 2019 à 14:03, Ivan Junckes Filho 
> a
> écrit :
>
> > Hey guys, I think there is an issue with parameters as the "in" property
> > is required by the spec and is not showing up. This affects swagger-ui as
> > it doesn't replace uf by the actual value. Anyone aware of this issue?
> >
> > {
> >   "openapi": "3.0.1",
> >   "paths": {
> > "/test/{uf}": {
> >   "get": {
> > "deprecated": false,
> > "description": "Test by UF.",
> > "operationId": "test",
> > "parameters": [
> >   {
> > "name": "uf",
> > "required": true,
> > "schema": {
> >   "type": "string"
> > },
> > "style": "simple"
> >   }
> > ],
> > "responses": {
> >   "200": {
> > "content": {
> >   "application/json": {
> > "schema": {
> >   "deprecated": false,
> >   "exclusiveMaximum": false,
> >   "exclusiveMinimum": false,
> >   "items": {
> >
> >   },
> >   "maxLength": 2147483647,
> >   "minLength": 0,
> >   "nullable": false,
> >   "properties": {
> >
> >   },
> >   "readOnly": false,
> >   "uniqueItems": false,
> >   "writeOnly": false
> > }
> >   }
> > },
> > "description": "Success"
> >   },
> >   "400": {
> > "content": {
> >   "200": {
> >
> >   }
> > },
> > "description": "Bad Request"
> >   }
> > },
> >
> >   }
> > },
> >
> >   }
> >   ]
> > }
> >
>

Re: "In" parameter not being populated OpenAPI

[Romain Manni-Bucau]

Hi Ivan,

Did you test on the snapshot? we got some enhancements about it.

Romain Manni-Bucau
@rmannibucau  |  Blog
 | Old Blog
 | Github  |
LinkedIn  | Book



Le lun. 11 févr. 2019 à 14:03, Ivan Junckes Filho  a
écrit :

> Hey guys, I think there is an issue with parameters as the "in" property
> is required by the spec and is not showing up. This affects swagger-ui as
> it doesn't replace uf by the actual value. Anyone aware of this issue?
>
> {
>   "openapi": "3.0.1",
>   "paths": {
> "/test/{uf}": {
>   "get": {
> "deprecated": false,
> "description": "Test by UF.",
> "operationId": "test",
> "parameters": [
>   {
> "name": "uf",
> "required": true,
> "schema": {
>   "type": "string"
> },
> "style": "simple"
>   }
> ],
> "responses": {
>   "200": {
> "content": {
>   "application/json": {
> "schema": {
>   "deprecated": false,
>   "exclusiveMaximum": false,
>   "exclusiveMinimum": false,
>   "items": {
>
>   },
>   "maxLength": 2147483647,
>   "minLength": 0,
>   "nullable": false,
>   "properties": {
>
>   },
>   "readOnly": false,
>   "uniqueItems": false,
>   "writeOnly": false
> }
>   }
> },
> "description": "Success"
>   },
>   "400": {
> "content": {
>   "200": {
>
>   }
> },
> "description": "Bad Request"
>   }
> },
>
>   }
> },
>
>   }
>   ]
> }
>

"In" parameter not being populated OpenAPI

[Ivan Junckes Filho]

Hey guys, I think there is an issue with parameters as the "in" property is
required by the spec and is not showing up. This affects swagger-ui as it
doesn't replace uf by the actual value. Anyone aware of this issue?

{
  "openapi": "3.0.1",
  "paths": {
"/test/{uf}": {
  "get": {
"deprecated": false,
"description": "Test by UF.",
"operationId": "test",
"parameters": [
  {
"name": "uf",
"required": true,
"schema": {
  "type": "string"
},
"style": "simple"
  }
],
"responses": {
  "200": {
"content": {
  "application/json": {
"schema": {
  "deprecated": false,
  "exclusiveMaximum": false,
  "exclusiveMinimum": false,
  "items": {

  },
  "maxLength": 2147483647,
  "minLength": 0,
  "nullable": false,
  "properties": {

  },
  "readOnly": false,
  "uniqueItems": false,
  "writeOnly": false
}
  }
},
"description": "Success"
  },
  "400": {
"content": {
  "200": {

  }
},
"description": "Bad Request"
  }
},

  }
},

  }
  ]
}