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 Michael Bouschen <mb...@spree.de> on 2005/02/15 16:29:09 UTC
Assertion numbers in renumbered JDO spec chapters
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
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
Re: Assertion numbers in renumbered JDO spec chapters
Posted by Michelle Caisse <Mi...@Sun.COM>.
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