You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to jdo-dev@db.apache.org by Michelle Caisse <Mi...@Sun.COM> on 2005/02/15 18:51:01 UTC
Re: Assertion numbers in renumbered JDO spec chapters
Yes, that does need to be done. I can do that when I have my turn at
the spreadsheet.
-- Michelle
Michael Bouschen wrote:
> Hi Craig, hi Michelle,
>
> some chapters of the JDO spec are renumbered from 1.0 to 2.0:
> Chapter JDO 1.0 JDO 2.0
> Extent 15 19
> JDO Reference Enhancer 20 21
> Interface StateManager 21 22
> JDOPermission 22 23
>
> I noticed from version 2005-01-14 of the JDO 2.0 spec on the
> assertions have been renumbered to follow the new chapter numbers,
> e.g. all the extent assertion are renumbered from A15.x to A19.x. Is
> this on purpose? If yes, we need to adapt the spreadsheet
> JdoTckAssertionsTable.sxc and the TCK test classes. We would need to
> include the old and the new assertion number into the test classes,
> because we want to use the existing test cases for JDO 1.0 and JDO 2.0.
>
> What do you think?
>
> Regards Michael
Re: Assertion numbers in renumbered JDO spec chapters
Posted by Michelle Caisse <Mi...@Sun.COM>.
I'm fine with either approach. I think you're right about the problem
with the JDO1 spec, so let's change the numbers back in the 2.0 spec.
-- Michelle
Michael Bouschen wrote:
> Hi Michelle,
>
> I thought about this again and meanwhile I'm not sure whether we
> should do the renumbering of the assertions. It is a lot of work
> changing the spreadsheet and the corresponding TCK test classes. But
> what concerns me more is that all the TCK test cases we have today are
> valid JDO 1 and JDO 2 tests. For JDO 1 they refer to an annotated
> spec that uses the old numbering. This means we would have to maintain
> both the old and the new numbers in the test cases.
>
> So I propose to keep the old numbers, even if they do not match the
> chapter numbers of the new spec. What do you think?
>
> Regards Michael
>
>
>> Yes, that does need to be done. I can do that when I have my turn at
>> the spreadsheet.
>>
>> -- Michelle
>>
>> Michael Bouschen wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Craig, hi Michelle,
>>>
>>> some chapters of the JDO spec are renumbered from 1.0 to 2.0:
>>> Chapter JDO 1.0 JDO 2.0
>>> Extent 15 19
>>> JDO Reference Enhancer 20 21
>>> Interface StateManager 21 22
>>> JDOPermission 22 23
>>>
>>> I noticed from version 2005-01-14 of the JDO 2.0 spec on the
>>> assertions have been renumbered to follow the new chapter numbers,
>>> e.g. all the extent assertion are renumbered from A15.x to A19.x. Is
>>> this on purpose? If yes, we need to adapt the spreadsheet
>>> JdoTckAssertionsTable.sxc and the TCK test classes. We would need to
>>> include the old and the new assertion number into the test classes,
>>> because we want to use the existing test cases for JDO 1.0 and JDO 2.0.
>>>
>>> What do you think?
>>>
>>> Regards Michael
>>
>>
>>
>
>
Re: Assertion numbers in renumbered JDO spec chapters
Posted by Michael Bouschen <mb...@spree.de>.
Hi Michelle,
I thought about this again and meanwhile I'm not sure whether we should
do the renumbering of the assertions. It is a lot of work changing the
spreadsheet and the corresponding TCK test classes. But what concerns me
more is that all the TCK test cases we have today are valid JDO 1 and
JDO 2 tests. For JDO 1 they refer to an annotated spec that uses the old
numbering. This means we would have to maintain both the old and the new
numbers in the test cases.
So I propose to keep the old numbers, even if they do not match the
chapter numbers of the new spec. What do you think?
Regards Michael
> Yes, that does need to be done. I can do that when I have my turn at
> the spreadsheet.
>
> -- Michelle
>
> Michael Bouschen wrote:
>
>> Hi Craig, hi Michelle,
>>
>> some chapters of the JDO spec are renumbered from 1.0 to 2.0:
>> Chapter JDO 1.0 JDO 2.0
>> Extent 15 19
>> JDO Reference Enhancer 20 21
>> Interface StateManager 21 22
>> JDOPermission 22 23
>>
>> I noticed from version 2005-01-14 of the JDO 2.0 spec on the
>> assertions have been renumbered to follow the new chapter numbers,
>> e.g. all the extent assertion are renumbered from A15.x to A19.x. Is
>> this on purpose? If yes, we need to adapt the spreadsheet
>> JdoTckAssertionsTable.sxc and the TCK test classes. We would need to
>> include the old and the new assertion number into the test classes,
>> because we want to use the existing test cases for JDO 1.0 and JDO 2.0.
>>
>> What do you think?
>>
>> Regards Michael
>
>
--
Michael Bouschen Tech@Spree Engineering GmbH
mailto:mbo.tech@spree.de http://www.tech.spree.de/
Tel.:++49/30/235 520-33 Buelowstr. 66
Fax.:++49/30/2175 2012 D-10783 Berlin