Mailing-List: contact harmony-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: harmony-dev@incubator.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (asf.osuosl.org: domain of mloenko@gmail.com designates
 66.249.82.192 as permitted sender)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws;
        s=beta; d=gmail.com;
        h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references;
        b=EsnoHIKmZahzN/8oE2QGTQW5PGmDKrvFyhRhoNFP7sJyS14myG1QeuLtrIX7J9Naryyed6UlJGDMQ5AuGPg9Ptoc/CdYsvjR2dinvyX2wN4YHRKs0N8vBUP4ZODT1Vti5ZSXKaxAKnqbGH7uAo6d+4g6ge1JeUC8Oq9CBgF6R5Q=
Message-ID: <906dd82e0606140607h603e9515lfb4b5dd0feb98f4a@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2006 20:07:34 +0700
From: "Mikhail Loenko" <mloenko@gmail.com>
To: harmony-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: [classlib] [testing] java.beans tests
In-Reply-To: <2c9597b90606140526r2fa2ea9bpaf6199a7dd1dea03@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
References: <2c9597b90606140526r2fa2ea9bpaf6199a7dd1dea03@mail.gmail.com>

Hi Alexei

2006/6/14, Alexei Zakharov <alexei.zakharov@gmail.com>:
> Hello to everyone,
>
> I am currently investigating tests for java.beans module. As far as I

Cool!


> understand there were two separate contributions of java.beans tests
> from two different parties. And these contributions were merged into
> the single combined test suite we have now in svn. As a result
> currently we have about 400 test case failures (excluded) out of
> approximately 1200. After spending some time on this I realize that we
> have two types of issues here:
>
> 1. Test checks the compliance with very deep detail of RI's behavior (that
> is not in spec).
> 2. Test expects the behavior that differs from the RI's behavior as well as
> from our implementation's behavior.
>
> As for point 1, I'm unsure here. Do we really need to be completely
> identical to the RI in terms of public methods behavior? Some RI
> decisions are strange.

Please publish all those differences, we will need to make decisions on
case-by-case basis.


> For point 2, I believe we should rewrite or delete such tests.

If once you rewrite a test you get a duplicate of another test then
the test might be
deleted. Otherwise it should be fixed.

Thanks,
Mikhail

>
> Thoughts, suggestions?
>
>
> --
> Alexei Zakharov,
> Intel Middleware Product Division
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: harmony-dev-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: harmony-dev-help@incubator.apache.org
>
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
To unsubscribe, e-mail: harmony-dev-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: harmony-dev-help@incubator.apache.org