Review request for JDK-8051561: Convert JAXP function tests: javax.xml.xpath.* to jtreg (testNG) tests
Hi Joe, alan and every one I'm working on jaxp functional test colocation which is traced by the bug JDK-8043091 <https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8043091>. We have finished to convert a few suite and the jaxp/xpath tracked by bug JDK-8051561 <https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8051561> is the first one chosen for public review. Can you please review the webrev below? your comments given would be helpful for our future work. http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~ewang/JDK-8051561/webrev.00/ Thanks, Eric
Hi Eric, A few comments: - TestBase.java: 39: typo "Unexcepted" -> "Unexpected" - TestUtils.java: 32: Consider moving XML_DIR to TestBase.java, it seems similar to the other static final strings - TestBase.java: 57,66; Is the extra starting/ending output useful for TestNg Tests? TestNg should already print a test header - XPath<xxx>: note that TestNg will report any uncaught exception as a failure; it is not necessary to catch the exception and call fail(). - XPathFunctionResolver01: Nice use of Lambda :) I realize these are ported tests and you may be keeping things as much as possible to the existing tests. Thanks, Roger On 7/25/2014 9:12 AM, Eric Wang wrote:
Hi Joe, alan and every one
I'm working on jaxp functional test colocation which is traced by the bug JDK-8043091 <https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8043091>. We have finished to convert a few suite and the jaxp/xpath tracked by bug JDK-8051561 <https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8051561> is the first one chosen for public review.
Can you please review the webrev below? your comments given would be helpful for our future work. http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~ewang/JDK-8051561/webrev.00/
Thanks, Eric
Hi Eric, This is a good start! The code looks much more cleaner than the previous tests, great work! 1. Base class I see that you picked a small set of tests from the Product group (a small surprise :-) since I thought you'd had the Auction-portal group). You probably already considered it, but I assume there may be three layers of base classes. By layers, I mean the following: jaxp test jaxp sqe test unittests astro auction portal gap product xslt Each layer may have its own functions. For example, test groups such as auction portal that used 3rd paty components may include functions such as that you previously added to the auction portal test. Furthermore, we've made it so that jaxp tests will run with/without security manager. Frank and Patrick are adding such ability to the unit tests. Could you work with them so that all of jaxp tests share the same set of base classes including the functions in your base class, and security/policy functions? 2. Unfinished tests I see that you removed unfinished tests, e.g XPath01 test 39 - 51, which reflected unimplemented feature. That's probably okay. Also removed are test 09 to 12 from XPathFactory01 that were commented out and moved to new test classes XPathFunctionResolver01 and XPathVariableResolver01. Unfortunately, the later was never completed due to the lose of the jaxp sqe engineer. It's not in the scope of this project to develop new tests, but could you leave a note somewhere in the tests? 3. Originally insufficient function test Nice use of Lambda as Roger said :-) If not for your clean-up, I wouldn't have noticed that the XPathFunctionResolver simply returned null and XPathFuction was never implemented. So it's not a surprise that there was indeed a bug in the area (JDK-4946192 XPathFunctionResolver is not used). Could you discuss with Jibing on what you may want to do in regards to item 2 and 3 above? Patrick had previously increased test coverage. I wonder if that would be something you would still consider. Thanks, Joe On 7/25/2014 6:12 AM, Eric Wang wrote:
Hi Joe, alan and every one
I'm working on jaxp functional test colocation which is traced by the bug JDK-8043091 <https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8043091>. We have finished to convert a few suite and the jaxp/xpath tracked by bug JDK-8051561 <https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8051561> is the first one chosen for public review.
Can you please review the webrev below? your comments given would be helpful for our future work. http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~ewang/JDK-8051561/webrev.00/
Thanks, Eric
Hi Joe, Alan and others We’re working on moving our internal jaxp functional tests to open idk repo(Include refactoring effort). This is the first open review I am asking for SAX and Transform. Would you please review these tests. Any comment will be appreciated. I put the webrev as follows: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~tyan/JDK-8051540/webrev00/ Thank you very much. Tristan
Hi Tristan, Nice work! As with those converted by Eric (8051561), the new tests looked much better and cleaner than the original ones. I see that you're using jaxp.library instead of a base class as in Eric's previous webrev. Is this the final decision on the whole test structure? It looks good. Have you run them with and without security manager? Thanks, Joe On 8/18/2014 10:46 AM, Tristan Yan wrote:
Hi Joe, Alan and others We’re working on moving our internal jaxp functional tests to open idk repo(Include refactoring effort). This is the first open review I am asking for SAX and Transform. Would you please review these tests. Any comment will be appreciated.
I put the webrev as follows: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~tyan/JDK-8051540/webrev00/ <http://cr.openjdk.java.net/%7Etyan/JDK-8051540/webrev00/>
Thank you very much. Tristan
Thanks Joe We intend to replace the base class with test library because that doesn’t look like a real base class but an utilities class. I haven’t tried to run these tests with security manager, I will run them with security manager then get back you soon. Thank you. Tristan
On Aug 18, 2014, at 4:32 PM, huizhe wang <huizhe.wang@oracle.com> wrote:
By the way, the plan has been that all of the JAXP SQE and Unit tests be migrated into [openjdk]/jaxp repo under jaxp/test. Tests currently in the jdk repo shall be moved to jaxp/test as well. I see that your webrev was generated in jdk9/dev/jdk. I hope it doesn't mean you're checking tests into the jdk repo. Thanks, Joe On 8/18/2014 4:42 PM, Tristan Yan wrote:
Thanks Joe We intend to replace the base class with test library because that doesn’t look like a real base class but an utilities class. I haven’t tried to run these tests with security manager, I will run them with security manager then get back you soon. Thank you. Tristan
On Aug 18, 2014, at 4:32 PM, huizhe wang <huizhe.wang@oracle.com <mailto:huizhe.wang@oracle.com>> wrote:
Thanks Joe. I will move the tests to [openjdk]/jaxp repo then. Tristan
On Aug 19, 2014, at 10:32 AM, huizhe wang <huizhe.wang@oracle.com> wrote:
By the way, the plan has been that all of the JAXP SQE and Unit tests be migrated into [openjdk]/jaxp repo under jaxp/test. Tests currently in the jdk repo shall be moved to jaxp/test as well. I see that your webrev was generated in jdk9/dev/jdk. I hope it doesn't mean you're checking tests into the jdk repo.
Thanks, Joe
On 8/18/2014 4:42 PM, Tristan Yan wrote:
Thanks Joe We intend to replace the base class with test library because that doesn’t look like a real base class but an utilities class. I haven’t tried to run these tests with security manager, I will run them with security manager then get back you soon. Thank you. Tristan
On Aug 18, 2014, at 4:32 PM, huizhe wang <huizhe.wang@oracle.com> wrote:
Hi Joe and others I updated the tests with putting them in jaxp repo. I also run these tests with security manager and they all passed http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~tyan/JDK-8051540/webrev01/ <http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~tyan/JDK-8051540/webrev01/> Also I’d like to propose our way for handling jaxp tests run with security manager. The way we’d use is creating two targets for running jaxp tests. One is for normal run; which will run all the tests without security manager. One is secure run; the target only run the tests that have to be run with security manager. This could be easy to be handled with adding two targets in makefile. And for most of people they only care about the function. They only need run normal run target. We would run two targets for any of our formal tests like nightly, ci build and jprt tests. For the tests which can not be run in secure mode(like tests for xsltc direct extension), we'd add testng group called “secure-hostile”. We won’t run these tests in secure mode by bypassing them in secure run target. By this way we could easily transform our tests as usual without additional effort. Thank you Tristan
On Aug 19, 2014, at 10:32 AM, huizhe wang <huizhe.wang@oracle.com> wrote:
By the way, the plan has been that all of the JAXP SQE and Unit tests be migrated into [openjdk]/jaxp repo under jaxp/test. Tests currently in the jdk repo shall be moved to jaxp/test as well. I see that your webrev was generated in jdk9/dev/jdk. I hope it doesn't mean you're checking tests into the jdk repo.
Thanks, Joe
On 8/18/2014 4:42 PM, Tristan Yan wrote:
Thanks Joe We intend to replace the base class with test library because that doesn’t look like a real base class but an utilities class. I haven’t tried to run these tests with security manager, I will run them with security manager then get back you soon. Thank you. Tristan
On Aug 18, 2014, at 4:32 PM, huizhe wang <huizhe.wang@oracle.com <mailto:huizhe.wang@oracle.com>> wrote:
On 8/27/2014 4:03 PM, Tristan Yan wrote:
Hi Joe and others
I updated the tests with putting them in jaxp repo. I also run these tests with security manager and they all passed http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~tyan/JDK-8051540/webrev01/ <http://cr.openjdk.java.net/%7Etyan/JDK-8051540/webrev01/>
Awesome.
Also I’d like to propose our way for handling jaxp tests run with security manager. The way we’d use is creating two targets for running jaxp tests. One is for normal run; which will run all the tests without security manager. One is secure run; the target only run the tests that have to be run with security manager. This could be easy to be handled with adding two targets in makefile. And for most of people they only care about the function. They only need run normal run target. We would run two targets for any of our formal tests like nightly, ci build and jprt tests.
Yes, please coordinate with Frank and Eric so that all of the jaxp tests share the same configuration.
For the tests which can not be run in secure mode(like tests for xsltc direct extension), we'd add testng group called “secure-hostile”. We won’t run these tests in secure mode by bypassing them in secure run target. By this way we could easily transform our tests as usual without additional effort.
I had been previously updated them so that all of the tests were capable of running with and without security manager. Sustaining SQE had invested several month to incorporate the changes into that hosted in Aurora. Please consider taking the patches from them if you haven't already done so. Thanks, Joe
Thank you Tristan
On Aug 19, 2014, at 10:32 AM, huizhe wang <huizhe.wang@oracle.com <mailto:huizhe.wang@oracle.com>> wrote:
By the way, the plan has been that all of the JAXP SQE and Unit tests be migrated into [openjdk]/jaxp repo under jaxp/test. Tests currently in the jdk repo shall be moved to jaxp/test as well. I see that your webrev was generated in jdk9/dev/jdk. I hope it doesn't mean you're checking tests into the jdk repo.
Thanks, Joe
On 8/18/2014 4:42 PM, Tristan Yan wrote:
Thanks Joe We intend to replace the base class with test library because that doesn’t look like a real base class but an utilities class. I haven’t tried to run these tests with security manager, I will run them with security manager then get back you soon. Thank you. Tristan
On Aug 18, 2014, at 4:32 PM, huizhe wang <huizhe.wang@oracle.com <mailto:huizhe.wang@oracle.com>> wrote:
Hi Joe The test Tristan mentioned that is unable to run with security manager is http://sqe-hgi.us.oracle.com/hg/index.cgi/testbase/javase/functional/9/xml/f... , it is used to test xslt redirect extension. When it runs with security manager, fails due to; java.lang.RuntimeException: Use of the extension element 'redirect' is not allowed when the secure processing feature is set to true. Anyway, Jibing would communicate with sustaining team about their patch, the discussion is in another mail chain. Best Regards Frank -----Original Message----- From: core-libs-dev [mailto:core-libs-dev-bounces@openjdk.java.net] On Behalf Of huizhe wang Sent: Thursday, August 28, 2014 7:39 AM To: Tristan Yan Cc: Core-Libs-Dev Subject: Re: Review request for JDK-8051540: Convert JAXP functin tests: org.xml.sax to jtreg (testNG) tests On 8/27/2014 4:03 PM, Tristan Yan wrote:
Hi Joe and others
I updated the tests with putting them in jaxp repo. I also run these
tests with security manager and they all passed
<http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~tyan/JDK-8051540/webrev01/> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~tyan/JDK-8051540/webrev01/
< <http://cr.openjdk.java.net/%7Etyan/JDK-8051540/webrev01/> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/%7Etyan/JDK-8051540/webrev01/>
Awesome.
Also I’d like to propose our way for handling jaxp tests run with
security manager. The way we’d use is creating two targets for
running jaxp tests. One is for normal run; which will run all the
tests without security manager. One is secure run; the target only run
the tests that have to be run with security manager. This could be
easy to be handled with adding two targets in makefile. And for most
of people they only care about the function. They only need run normal
run target. We would run two targets for any of our formal tests like
nightly, ci build and jprt tests.
Yes, please coordinate with Frank and Eric so that all of the jaxp tests share the same configuration.
For the tests which can not be run in secure mode(like tests for xsltc
direct extension), we'd add testng group called “secure-hostile”. We
won’t run these tests in secure mode by bypassing them in secure run
target. By this way we could easily transform our tests as usual
without additional effort.
I had been previously updated them so that all of the tests were capable of running with and without security manager. Sustaining SQE had invested several month to incorporate the changes into that hosted in Aurora. Please consider taking the patches from them if you haven't already done so. Thanks, Joe
Thank you
Tristan
On Aug 19, 2014, at 10:32 AM, huizhe wang <huizhe.wang@oracle.com
< <mailto:huizhe.wang@oracle.com> mailto:huizhe.wang@oracle.com>> wrote:
By the way, the plan has been that all of the JAXP SQE and Unit tests
be migrated into [openjdk]/jaxp repo under jaxp/test. Tests currently
in the jdk repo shall be moved to jaxp/test as well. I see that your
webrev was generated in jdk9/dev/jdk. I hope it doesn't mean you're
checking tests into the jdk repo.
Thanks,
Joe
On 8/18/2014 4:42 PM, Tristan Yan wrote:
Thanks Joe
We intend to replace the base class with test library because that
doesn’t look like a real base class but an utilities class.
I haven’t tried to run these tests with security manager, I will run
them with security manager then get back you soon.
Thank you.
Tristan
On Aug 18, 2014, at 4:32 PM, huizhe wang <huizhe.wang@oracle.com
< <mailto:huizhe.wang@oracle.com> mailto:huizhe.wang@oracle.com>> wrote:
The patches I mentioned would disable security manager or grant specific permissions needed to run those code, so that no test needs to be excluded from a target (whether with or without security manager). Thanks, Joe On 8/27/2014 8:42 PM, Frank Yuan wrote:
Hi Joe
The test Tristan mentioned that is unable to run with security manager is http://sqe-hgi.us.oracle.com/hg/index.cgi/testbase/javase/functional/9/xml/f... , it is used to test xslt redirect extension. When it runs with security manager, fails due to;
/java.lang.RuntimeException: Use of the extension element 'redirect' is not allowed when the secure processing feature is set to true./
Anyway, Jibing would communicate with sustaining team about their patch, the discussion is in another mail chain.
Best Regards
Frank
-----Original Message----- From: core-libs-dev [mailto:core-libs-dev-bounces@openjdk.java.net] On Behalf Of huizhe wang Sent: Thursday, August 28, 2014 7:39 AM To: Tristan Yan Cc: Core-Libs-Dev Subject: Re: Review request for JDK-8051540: Convert JAXP functin tests: org.xml.sax to jtreg (testNG) tests
On 8/27/2014 4:03 PM, Tristan Yan wrote:
Hi Joe and others
I updated the tests with putting them in jaxp repo. I also run these
tests with security manager and they all passed
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~tyan/JDK-8051540/webrev01/ <http://cr.openjdk.java.net/%7Etyan/JDK-8051540/webrev01/>
Awesome.
Also I’d like to propose our way for handling jaxp tests run with
security manager. The way we’d use is creating two targets for
running jaxp tests. One is for normal run; which will run all the
tests without security manager. One is secure run; the target only run
the tests that have to be run with security manager. This could be
easy to be handled with adding two targets in makefile. And for most
of people they only care about the function. They only need run normal
run target. We would run two targets for any of our formal tests like
nightly, ci build and jprt tests.
Yes, please coordinate with Frank and Eric so that all of the jaxp tests share the same configuration.
For the tests which can not be run in secure mode(like tests for xsltc
direct extension), we'd add testng group called “secure-hostile”. We
won’t run these tests in secure mode by bypassing them in secure run
target. By this way we could easily transform our tests as usual
without additional effort.
I had been previously updated them so that all of the tests were capable of running with and without security manager. Sustaining SQE had invested several month to incorporate the changes into that hosted in Aurora. Please consider taking the patches from them if you haven't already done so.
Thanks,
Joe
Thank you
Tristan
On Aug 19, 2014, at 10:32 AM, huizhe wang <huizhe.wang@oracle.com
<mailto:huizhe.wang@oracle.com>> wrote:
By the way, the plan has been that all of the JAXP SQE and Unit tests
be migrated into [openjdk]/jaxp repo under jaxp/test. Tests currently
in the jdk repo shall be moved to jaxp/test as well. I see that your
webrev was generated in jdk9/dev/jdk. I hope it doesn't mean you're
checking tests into the jdk repo.
Thanks,
Joe
On 8/18/2014 4:42 PM, Tristan Yan wrote:
Thanks Joe
We intend to replace the base class with test library because that
doesn’t look like a real base class but an utilities class.
I haven’t tried to run these tests with security manager, I will run
them with security manager then get back you soon.
Thank you.
Tristan
On Aug 18, 2014, at 4:32 PM, huizhe wang <huizhe.wang@oracle.com
<mailto:huizhe.wang@oracle.com>> wrote:
I haven't yet had a chance to look at the JAXP tests, but this kind of message suggests to me that they don't separate what is in JAXP (the interface) from what is in Xalan and Xerces (the implementations).Would that be a correct assumption? The "redirect" extension is not a JAXP feature, it is a Xalan feature. I've had the impression for some years that the management of JAXP as an interface is far too closely tied up with the management of the JAXP implementations within the JDK. Michael Kay Saxonica mike@saxonica.com +44 (0) 118 946 5893 On 28 Aug 2014, at 04:42, Frank Yuan <frank.yuan@oracle.com> wrote:
Hi Joe
The test Tristan mentioned that is unable to run with security manager is http://sqe-hgi.us.oracle.com/hg/index.cgi/testbase/javase/functional/9/xml/f... , it is used to test xslt redirect extension. When it runs with security manager, fails due to;
java.lang.RuntimeException: Use of the extension element 'redirect' is not allowed when the secure processing feature is set to true.
Anyway, Jibing would communicate with sustaining team about their patch, the discussion is in another mail chain.
Best Regards
Frank
-----Original Message----- From: core-libs-dev [mailto:core-libs-dev-bounces@openjdk.java.net] On Behalf Of huizhe wang Sent: Thursday, August 28, 2014 7:39 AM To: Tristan Yan Cc: Core-Libs-Dev Subject: Re: Review request for JDK-8051540: Convert JAXP functin tests: org.xml.sax to jtreg (testNG) tests
On 8/27/2014 4:03 PM, Tristan Yan wrote:
Hi Joe and others
I updated the tests with putting them in jaxp repo. I also run these
tests with security manager and they all passed
<http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~tyan/JDK-8051540/webrev01/> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~tyan/JDK-8051540/webrev01/
< <http://cr.openjdk.java.net/%7Etyan/JDK-8051540/webrev01/> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/%7Etyan/JDK-8051540/webrev01/>
Awesome.
Also I’d like to propose our way for handling jaxp tests run with
security manager. The way we’d use is creating two targets for
running jaxp tests. One is for normal run; which will run all the
tests without security manager. One is secure run; the target only run
the tests that have to be run with security manager. This could be
easy to be handled with adding two targets in makefile. And for most
of people they only care about the function. They only need run normal
run target. We would run two targets for any of our formal tests like
nightly, ci build and jprt tests.
Yes, please coordinate with Frank and Eric so that all of the jaxp tests share the same configuration.
For the tests which can not be run in secure mode(like tests for xsltc
direct extension), we'd add testng group called “secure-hostile”. We
won’t run these tests in secure mode by bypassing them in secure run
target. By this way we could easily transform our tests as usual
without additional effort.
I had been previously updated them so that all of the tests were capable of running with and without security manager. Sustaining SQE had invested several month to incorporate the changes into that hosted in Aurora. Please consider taking the patches from them if you haven't already done so.
Thanks,
Joe
Thank you
Tristan
On Aug 19, 2014, at 10:32 AM, huizhe wang <huizhe.wang@oracle.com
< <mailto:huizhe.wang@oracle.com> mailto:huizhe.wang@oracle.com>> wrote:
By the way, the plan has been that all of the JAXP SQE and Unit tests
be migrated into [openjdk]/jaxp repo under jaxp/test. Tests currently
in the jdk repo shall be moved to jaxp/test as well. I see that your
webrev was generated in jdk9/dev/jdk. I hope it doesn't mean you're
checking tests into the jdk repo.
Thanks,
Joe
On 8/18/2014 4:42 PM, Tristan Yan wrote:
Thanks Joe
We intend to replace the base class with test library because that
doesn’t look like a real base class but an utilities class.
I haven’t tried to run these tests with security manager, I will run
them with security manager then get back you soon.
Thank you.
Tristan
On Aug 18, 2014, at 4:32 PM, huizhe wang <huizhe.wang@oracle.com
< <mailto:huizhe.wang@oracle.com> mailto:huizhe.wang@oracle.com>> wrote:
Hi, Michael Secure processing feature(XMLConstants.FEATURE_SECURE_PROCESSING) is also valid for transform API(Xalan). And the transform API is a portion of JAXP. To Joe Please correct me if I am wrong. Best Regards Frank -----Original Message----- From: Michael Kay [mailto:mike@saxonica.com] Sent: Thursday, August 28, 2014 3:31 PM To: Frank Yuan Cc: huizhe wang; Tristan Yan; Core-Libs-Dev Subject: Re: Review request for JDK-8051540: Convert JAXP functin tests: org.xml.sax to jtreg (testNG) tests I haven't yet had a chance to look at the JAXP tests, but this kind of message suggests to me that they don't separate what is in JAXP (the interface) from what is in Xalan and Xerces (the implementations).Would that be a correct assumption? The "redirect" extension is not a JAXP feature, it is a Xalan feature. I've had the impression for some years that the management of JAXP as an interface is far too closely tied up with the management of the JAXP implementations within the JDK. Michael Kay Saxonica mike@saxonica.com <mailto:mike@saxonica.com> +44 (0) 118 946 5893 On 28 Aug 2014, at 04:42, Frank Yuan <frank.yuan@oracle.com <mailto:frank.yuan@oracle.com> > wrote:
Hi Joe
The test Tristan mentioned that is unable to run with security manager is bug6513892 <http://sqe-hgi.us.oracle.com/hg/index.cgi/testbase/javase/functional/9/xml/ file/3f7ae9b99933/src/JAXP/unittests/unit-test/bug6513892> , it is used to test xslt redirect extension. When it runs with security manager, fails due to;
java.lang.RuntimeException: Use of the extension element 'redirect' is not allowed when the secure processing feature is set to true.
Anyway, Jibing would communicate with sustaining team about their patch, the discussion is in another mail chain.
Best Regards
Frank
-----Original Message----- From: core-libs-dev [mailto:core-libs-dev-bounces@openjdk.java.net] On Behalf Of huizhe wang Sent: Thursday, August 28, 2014 7:39 AM To: Tristan Yan Cc: Core-Libs-Dev Subject: Re: Review request for JDK-8051540: Convert JAXP functin tests: org.xml.sax to jtreg (testNG) tests
On 8/27/2014 4:03 PM, Tristan Yan wrote:
Hi Joe and others
I updated the tests with putting them in jaxp repo. I also run these
tests with security manager and they all passed
<http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~tyan/JDK-8051540/webrev01/> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~tyan/JDK-8051540/webrev01/
< <http://cr.openjdk.java.net/%7Etyan/JDK-8051540/webrev01/> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/%7Etyan/JDK-8051540/webrev01/>
Awesome.
Also I'd like to propose our way for handling jaxp tests run with
security manager. The way we'd use is creating two targets for
running jaxp tests. One is for normal run; which will run all the
tests without security manager. One is secure run; the target only run
the tests that have to be run with security manager. This could be
easy to be handled with adding two targets in makefile. And for most
of people they only care about the function. They only need run normal
run target. We would run two targets for any of our formal tests like
nightly, ci build and jprt tests.
Yes, please coordinate with Frank and Eric so that all of the jaxp tests share the same configuration.
For the tests which can not be run in secure mode(like tests for xsltc
direct extension), we'd add testng group called "secure-hostile". We
won't run these tests in secure mode by bypassing them in secure run
target. By this way we could easily transform our tests as usual
without additional effort.
I had been previously updated them so that all of the tests were capable of running with and without security manager. Sustaining SQE had invested several month to incorporate the changes into that hosted in Aurora. Please consider taking the patches from them if you haven't already done so.
Thanks,
Joe
Thank you
Tristan
On Aug 19, 2014, at 10:32 AM, huizhe wang <huizhe.wang@oracle.com
< <mailto:huizhe.wang@oracle.com> mailto:huizhe.wang@oracle.com>> wrote:
By the way, the plan has been that all of the JAXP SQE and Unit tests
be migrated into [openjdk]/jaxp repo under jaxp/test. Tests currently
in the jdk repo shall be moved to jaxp/test as well. I see that your
webrev was generated in jdk9/dev/jdk. I hope it doesn't mean you're
checking tests into the jdk repo.
Thanks,
Joe
On 8/18/2014 4:42 PM, Tristan Yan wrote:
Thanks Joe
We intend to replace the base class with test library because that
doesn't look like a real base class but an utilities class.
I haven't tried to run these tests with security manager, I will run
them with security manager then get back you soon.
Thank you.
Tristan
On Aug 18, 2014, at 4:32 PM, huizhe wang <huizhe.wang@oracle.com
< <mailto:huizhe.wang@oracle.com> mailto:huizhe.wang@oracle.com>> wrote:
Hi Michael, These are functional and unit tests. They reflect what are supported by the JDK. So yes, you are right, a good portion of them are relevant to the implementation. If you are looking for pure JAXP API tests, you'd find them in the JCK. Thanks, Joe On 8/28/2014 12:31 AM, Michael Kay wrote:
I haven't yet had a chance to look at the JAXP tests, but this kind of message suggests to me that they don't separate what is in JAXP (the interface) from what is in Xalan and Xerces (the implementations).Would that be a correct assumption? The "redirect" extension is not a JAXP feature, it is a Xalan feature.
I've had the impression for some years that the management of JAXP as an interface is far too closely tied up with the management of the JAXP implementations within the JDK.
Michael Kay Saxonica mike@saxonica.com +44 (0) 118 946 5893
On 28 Aug 2014, at 04:42, Frank Yuan <frank.yuan@oracle.com> wrote:
Hi Joe
The test Tristan mentioned that is unable to run with security manager is http://sqe-hgi.us.oracle.com/hg/index.cgi/testbase/javase/functional/9/xml/f... , it is used to test xslt redirect extension. When it runs with security manager, fails due to;
java.lang.RuntimeException: Use of the extension element 'redirect' is not allowed when the secure processing feature is set to true.
Anyway, Jibing would communicate with sustaining team about their patch, the discussion is in another mail chain.
Best Regards
Frank
-----Original Message----- From: core-libs-dev [mailto:core-libs-dev-bounces@openjdk.java.net] On Behalf Of huizhe wang Sent: Thursday, August 28, 2014 7:39 AM To: Tristan Yan Cc: Core-Libs-Dev Subject: Re: Review request for JDK-8051540: Convert JAXP functin tests: org.xml.sax to jtreg (testNG) tests
On 8/27/2014 4:03 PM, Tristan Yan wrote:
Hi Joe and others I updated the tests with putting them in jaxp repo. I also run these tests with security manager and they all passed <http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~tyan/JDK-8051540/webrev01/> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~tyan/JDK-8051540/webrev01/ < <http://cr.openjdk.java.net/%7Etyan/JDK-8051540/webrev01/> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/%7Etyan/JDK-8051540/webrev01/>
Awesome.
Also I’d like to propose our way for handling jaxp tests run with security manager. The way we’d use is creating two targets for running jaxp tests. One is for normal run; which will run all the tests without security manager. One is secure run; the target only run the tests that have to be run with security manager. This could be easy to be handled with adding two targets in makefile. And for most of people they only care about the function. They only need run normal run target. We would run two targets for any of our formal tests like nightly, ci build and jprt tests.
Yes, please coordinate with Frank and Eric so that all of the jaxp tests share the same configuration.
For the tests which can not be run in secure mode(like tests for xsltc direct extension), we'd add testng group called “secure-hostile”. We won’t run these tests in secure mode by bypassing them in secure run target. By this way we could easily transform our tests as usual without additional effort.
I had been previously updated them so that all of the tests were capable of running with and without security manager. Sustaining SQE had invested several month to incorporate the changes into that hosted in Aurora. Please consider taking the patches from them if you haven't already done so.
Thanks,
Joe
Thank you Tristan
On Aug 19, 2014, at 10:32 AM, huizhe wang <huizhe.wang@oracle.com < <mailto:huizhe.wang@oracle.com> mailto:huizhe.wang@oracle.com>> wrote: By the way, the plan has been that all of the JAXP SQE and Unit tests be migrated into [openjdk]/jaxp repo under jaxp/test. Tests currently in the jdk repo shall be moved to jaxp/test as well. I see that your webrev was generated in jdk9/dev/jdk. I hope it doesn't mean you're checking tests into the jdk repo. Thanks, Joe On 8/18/2014 4:42 PM, Tristan Yan wrote:
Thanks Joe We intend to replace the base class with test library because that doesn’t look like a real base class but an utilities class. I haven’t tried to run these tests with security manager, I will run them with security manager then get back you soon. Thank you. Tristan
On Aug 18, 2014, at 4:32 PM, huizhe wang <huizhe.wang@oracle.com < <mailto:huizhe.wang@oracle.com> mailto:huizhe.wang@oracle.com>> wrote:
On 28/08/2014 08:31, Michael Kay wrote:
I haven't yet had a chance to look at the JAXP tests, but this kind of message suggests to me that they don't separate what is in JAXP (the interface) from what is in Xalan and Xerces (the implementations).Would that be a correct assumption? The "redirect" extension is not a JAXP feature, it is a Xalan feature.
I've had the impression for some years that the management of JAXP as an interface is far too closely tied up with the management of the JAXP implementations within the JDK.
Just to add to Joe's comments then it is important to have a comprehensive set of tests that fully exercise the implementation and any JDK-specific implementation features. Clearly conformance tests for the JAXP API should only have tests that are developed based on the specification but that is the role of the conformance suite/JCK (which is not in OpenJDK). -Alan.
Hi Joe Could you be my sponsor to push this if you’re okay with the code. Thank you Tristan
On Aug 27, 2014, at 4:38 PM, huizhe wang <huizhe.wang@oracle.com> wrote:
On 8/27/2014 4:03 PM, Tristan Yan wrote:
Hi Joe and others
I updated the tests with putting them in jaxp repo. I also run these tests with security manager and they all passed http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~tyan/JDK-8051540/webrev01/ <http://cr.openjdk.java.net/%7Etyan/JDK-8051540/webrev01/>
Awesome.
Also I’d like to propose our way for handling jaxp tests run with security manager. The way we’d use is creating two targets for running jaxp tests. One is for normal run; which will run all the tests without security manager. One is secure run; the target only run the tests that have to be run with security manager. This could be easy to be handled with adding two targets in makefile. And for most of people they only care about the function. They only need run normal run target. We would run two targets for any of our formal tests like nightly, ci build and jprt tests.
Yes, please coordinate with Frank and Eric so that all of the jaxp tests share the same configuration.
For the tests which can not be run in secure mode(like tests for xsltc direct extension), we'd add testng group called “secure-hostile”. We won’t run these tests in secure mode by bypassing them in secure run target. By this way we could easily transform our tests as usual without additional effort.
I had been previously updated them so that all of the tests were capable of running with and without security manager. Sustaining SQE had invested several month to incorporate the changes into that hosted in Aurora. Please consider taking the patches from them if you haven't already done so.
Thanks, Joe
Thank you Tristan
On Aug 19, 2014, at 10:32 AM, huizhe wang <huizhe.wang@oracle.com <mailto:huizhe.wang@oracle.com>> wrote:
By the way, the plan has been that all of the JAXP SQE and Unit tests be migrated into [openjdk]/jaxp repo under jaxp/test. Tests currently in the jdk repo shall be moved to jaxp/test as well. I see that your webrev was generated in jdk9/dev/jdk. I hope it doesn't mean you're checking tests into the jdk repo.
Thanks, Joe
On 8/18/2014 4:42 PM, Tristan Yan wrote:
Thanks Joe We intend to replace the base class with test library because that doesn’t look like a real base class but an utilities class. I haven’t tried to run these tests with security manager, I will run them with security manager then get back you soon. Thank you. Tristan
On Aug 18, 2014, at 4:32 PM, huizhe wang <huizhe.wang@oracle.com <mailto:huizhe.wang@oracle.com>> wrote:
Joe, You mentioned recently that you were considering folding the jaxp repo into some other repos. Would it matter if we put these functional tests into the existing jaxp repo (<openjdk forest>/jaxp/test)? Or, would jaxp tests be under whatever the 'other' repo is? We had planned to migrate jaxp unit and functional tests to jaxp repo/test, and then move jaxp tests currently under jdk/test to jaxp/test as well. These patches are big. I hope we don't have to move them around :-) Thanks, Joe On 10/14/2014 3:10 PM, Tristan Yan wrote:
Hi Joe Could you be my sponsor to push this if you’re okay with the code. Thank you Tristan
On Aug 27, 2014, at 4:38 PM, huizhe wang <huizhe.wang@oracle.com <mailto:huizhe.wang@oracle.com>> wrote:
On 8/27/2014 4:03 PM, Tristan Yan wrote:
Hi Joe and others
I updated the tests with putting them in jaxp repo. I also run these tests with security manager and they all passed http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~tyan/JDK-8051540/webrev01/ <http://cr.openjdk.java.net/%7Etyan/JDK-8051540/webrev01/>
Awesome.
Also I’d like to propose our way for handling jaxp tests run with security manager. The way we’d use is creating two targets for running jaxp tests. One is for normal run; which will run all the tests without security manager. One is secure run; the target only run the tests that have to be run with security manager. This could be easy to be handled with adding two targets in makefile. And for most of people they only care about the function. They only need run normal run target. We would run two targets for any of our formal tests like nightly, ci build and jprt tests.
Yes, please coordinate with Frank and Eric so that all of the jaxp tests share the same configuration.
For the tests which can not be run in secure mode(like tests for xsltc direct extension), we'd add testng group called “secure-hostile”. We won’t run these tests in secure mode by bypassing them in secure run target. By this way we could easily transform our tests as usual without additional effort.
I had been previously updated them so that all of the tests were capable of running with and without security manager. Sustaining SQE had invested several month to incorporate the changes into that hosted in Aurora. Please consider taking the patches from them if you haven't already done so.
Thanks, Joe
Thank you Tristan
On Aug 19, 2014, at 10:32 AM, huizhe wang <huizhe.wang@oracle.com <mailto:huizhe.wang@oracle.com>> wrote:
By the way, the plan has been that all of the JAXP SQE and Unit tests be migrated into [openjdk]/jaxp repo under jaxp/test. Tests currently in the jdk repo shall be moved to jaxp/test as well. I see that your webrev was generated in jdk9/dev/jdk. I hope it doesn't mean you're checking tests into the jdk repo.
Thanks, Joe
On 8/18/2014 4:42 PM, Tristan Yan wrote:
Thanks Joe We intend to replace the base class with test library because that doesn’t look like a real base class but an utilities class. I haven’t tried to run these tests with security manager, I will run them with security manager then get back you soon. Thank you. Tristan
On Aug 18, 2014, at 4:32 PM, huizhe wang <huizhe.wang@oracle.com <mailto:huizhe.wang@oracle.com>> wrote:
Hi Joe, Before performing the full investigation, I'm now leaning toward have a "base" repo which would host files currently in the jdk, langtools, and hotspot repos and then another repo for all the other library code (jaxp, jaxws, corba). Compared to moving around all the source files in the jdk repo, I think the other potential changes are fairly small! HTH, -Joe On 10/15/2014 1:43 AM, huizhe wang wrote:
Joe,
You mentioned recently that you were considering folding the jaxp repo into some other repos. Would it matter if we put these functional tests into the existing jaxp repo (<openjdk forest>/jaxp/test)? Or, would jaxp tests be under whatever the 'other' repo is?
We had planned to migrate jaxp unit and functional tests to jaxp repo/test, and then move jaxp tests currently under jdk/test to jaxp/test as well.
These patches are big. I hope we don't have to move them around :-)
Thanks, Joe
On 10/14/2014 3:10 PM, Tristan Yan wrote:
Hi Joe Could you be my sponsor to push this if you’re okay with the code. Thank you Tristan
On Aug 27, 2014, at 4:38 PM, huizhe wang <huizhe.wang@oracle.com <mailto:huizhe.wang@oracle.com>> wrote:
On 8/27/2014 4:03 PM, Tristan Yan wrote:
Hi Joe and others
I updated the tests with putting them in jaxp repo. I also run these tests with security manager and they all passed http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~tyan/JDK-8051540/webrev01/ <http://cr.openjdk.java.net/%7Etyan/JDK-8051540/webrev01/>
Awesome.
Also I’d like to propose our way for handling jaxp tests run with security manager. The way we’d use is creating two targets for running jaxp tests. One is for normal run; which will run all the tests without security manager. One is secure run; the target only run the tests that have to be run with security manager. This could be easy to be handled with adding two targets in makefile. And for most of people they only care about the function. They only need run normal run target. We would run two targets for any of our formal tests like nightly, ci build and jprt tests.
Yes, please coordinate with Frank and Eric so that all of the jaxp tests share the same configuration.
For the tests which can not be run in secure mode(like tests for xsltc direct extension), we'd add testng group called “secure-hostile”. We won’t run these tests in secure mode by bypassing them in secure run target. By this way we could easily transform our tests as usual without additional effort.
I had been previously updated them so that all of the tests were capable of running with and without security manager. Sustaining SQE had invested several month to incorporate the changes into that hosted in Aurora. Please consider taking the patches from them if you haven't already done so.
Thanks, Joe
Thank you Tristan
On Aug 19, 2014, at 10:32 AM, huizhe wang <huizhe.wang@oracle.com <mailto:huizhe.wang@oracle.com>> wrote:
By the way, the plan has been that all of the JAXP SQE and Unit tests be migrated into [openjdk]/jaxp repo under jaxp/test. Tests currently in the jdk repo shall be moved to jaxp/test as well. I see that your webrev was generated in jdk9/dev/jdk. I hope it doesn't mean you're checking tests into the jdk repo.
Thanks, Joe
On 8/18/2014 4:42 PM, Tristan Yan wrote:
Thanks Joe We intend to replace the base class with test library because that doesn’t look like a real base class but an utilities class. I haven’t tried to run these tests with security manager, I will run them with security manager then get back you soon. Thank you. Tristan
> On Aug 18, 2014, at 4:32 PM, huizhe wang <huizhe.wang@oracle.com > <mailto:huizhe.wang@oracle.com>> wrote: > >
On 10/15/2014 8:35 AM, Joe Darcy wrote:
Hi Joe,
Before performing the full investigation, I'm now leaning toward have a "base" repo which would host files currently in the jdk, langtools, and hotspot repos and then another repo for all the other library code (jaxp, jaxws, corba).
Something like this? otherlib repo/ jaxp/src and etc. jaxws corba Currently, we are enjoying the benefit of being a repo by itself, that is, using the whole repo as our workspace. But I understand the need for consolidating, as long as it's in its own root directory, I think it would be fine.
Compared to moving around all the source files in the jdk repo, I think the other potential changes are fairly small!
True, I'll push the change then. Thanks! Joe
HTH,
-Joe
On 10/15/2014 1:43 AM, huizhe wang wrote:
Joe,
You mentioned recently that you were considering folding the jaxp repo into some other repos. Would it matter if we put these functional tests into the existing jaxp repo (<openjdk forest>/jaxp/test)? Or, would jaxp tests be under whatever the 'other' repo is?
We had planned to migrate jaxp unit and functional tests to jaxp repo/test, and then move jaxp tests currently under jdk/test to jaxp/test as well.
These patches are big. I hope we don't have to move them around :-)
Thanks, Joe
On 10/14/2014 3:10 PM, Tristan Yan wrote:
Hi Joe Could you be my sponsor to push this if you’re okay with the code. Thank you Tristan
On Aug 27, 2014, at 4:38 PM, huizhe wang <huizhe.wang@oracle.com <mailto:huizhe.wang@oracle.com>> wrote:
On 8/27/2014 4:03 PM, Tristan Yan wrote:
Hi Joe and others
I updated the tests with putting them in jaxp repo. I also run these tests with security manager and they all passed http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~tyan/JDK-8051540/webrev01/ <http://cr.openjdk.java.net/%7Etyan/JDK-8051540/webrev01/>
Awesome.
Also I’d like to propose our way for handling jaxp tests run with security manager. The way we’d use is creating two targets for running jaxp tests. One is for normal run; which will run all the tests without security manager. One is secure run; the target only run the tests that have to be run with security manager. This could be easy to be handled with adding two targets in makefile. And for most of people they only care about the function. They only need run normal run target. We would run two targets for any of our formal tests like nightly, ci build and jprt tests.
Yes, please coordinate with Frank and Eric so that all of the jaxp tests share the same configuration.
For the tests which can not be run in secure mode(like tests for xsltc direct extension), we'd add testng group called “secure-hostile”. We won’t run these tests in secure mode by bypassing them in secure run target. By this way we could easily transform our tests as usual without additional effort.
I had been previously updated them so that all of the tests were capable of running with and without security manager. Sustaining SQE had invested several month to incorporate the changes into that hosted in Aurora. Please consider taking the patches from them if you haven't already done so.
Thanks, Joe
Thank you Tristan
On Aug 19, 2014, at 10:32 AM, huizhe wang <huizhe.wang@oracle.com <mailto:huizhe.wang@oracle.com>> wrote:
By the way, the plan has been that all of the JAXP SQE and Unit tests be migrated into [openjdk]/jaxp repo under jaxp/test. Tests currently in the jdk repo shall be moved to jaxp/test as well. I see that your webrev was generated in jdk9/dev/jdk. I hope it doesn't mean you're checking tests into the jdk repo.
Thanks, Joe
On 8/18/2014 4:42 PM, Tristan Yan wrote: > Thanks Joe > We intend to replace the base class with test library because > that doesn’t look like a real base class but an utilities class. > I haven’t tried to run these tests with security manager, I will > run them with security manager then get back you soon. > Thank you. > Tristan > >> On Aug 18, 2014, at 4:32 PM, huizhe wang >> <huizhe.wang@oracle.com <mailto:huizhe.wang@oracle.com>> wrote: >> >> >
On 10/15/2014 11:09 AM, huizhe wang wrote:
On 10/15/2014 8:35 AM, Joe Darcy wrote:
Hi Joe,
Before performing the full investigation, I'm now leaning toward have a "base" repo which would host files currently in the jdk, langtools, and hotspot repos and then another repo for all the other library code (jaxp, jaxws, corba).
Something like this? otherlib repo/ jaxp/src and etc. jaxws corba
Currently, we are enjoying the benefit of being a repo by itself, that is, using the whole repo as our workspace. But I understand the need for consolidating, as long as it's in its own root directory, I think it would be fine.
I'd expect something more like otherlib repo/ src/$MODULE_NAME_FOR_JAXP src/$MODULE_NAME_FOR_JAXWS ... as now in the jdk repo, which may end up being basically isomorphic to the above. Thanks, -Joe
On 10/15/2014 12:06 PM, Joe Darcy wrote:
On 10/15/2014 11:09 AM, huizhe wang wrote:
On 10/15/2014 8:35 AM, Joe Darcy wrote:
Hi Joe,
Before performing the full investigation, I'm now leaning toward have a "base" repo which would host files currently in the jdk, langtools, and hotspot repos and then another repo for all the other library code (jaxp, jaxws, corba).
Something like this? otherlib repo/ jaxp/src and etc. jaxws corba
Currently, we are enjoying the benefit of being a repo by itself, that is, using the whole repo as our workspace. But I understand the need for consolidating, as long as it's in its own root directory, I think it would be fine.
I'd expect something more like
otherlib repo/
src/$MODULE_NAME_FOR_JAXP src/$MODULE_NAME_FOR_JAXWS ...
as now in the jdk repo, which may end up being basically isomorphic to the above.
Make sense. JAXP is in one module anyways -- a positive for me :-) Where would you think the tests would end up? otherlib repo/test? otherlib repo/test jaxp jaxws ... in which case, jaxp/test would be moved to otherlib repo/test/jaxp. Thanks, Joe
Thanks,
-Joe
Hi Joe, Alan and others I took over Eric’s last work and did some refactor for his code. Please help to review the code change again. webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~tyan/JDK-8051561/webrev.01/ <http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~tyan/JDK-8051561/webrev.01/> bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8051561 These code has been run with security manager and without security manager both and all passed. Thank you Tristan
On Jul 25, 2014, at 6:12 AM, Eric Wang <yiming.wang@oracle.com> wrote:
Hi Joe, alan and every one
I'm working on jaxp functional test colocation which is traced by the bug JDK-8043091 <https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8043091>. We have finished to convert a few suite and the jaxp/xpath tracked by bug JDK-8051561 <https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8051561> is the first one chosen for public review.
Can you please review the webrev below? your comments given would be helpful for our future work. http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~ewang/JDK-8051561/webrev.00/ <http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~ewang/JDK-8051561/webrev.00/>
Thanks, Eric
Hi Tristan, Looks good. I left notes in the bug's comment section as a record and status of the original test development. Thanks, Joe On 8/29/2014 9:50 AM, Tristan Yan wrote:
Hi Joe, Alan and others I took over Eric’s last work and did some refactor for his code. Please help to review the code change again. webrev: _http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~tyan/JDK-8051561/webrev.01/ <http://cr.openjdk.java.net/%7Etyan/JDK-8051561/webrev.01/>_ bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8051561
These code has been run with security manager and without security manager both and all passed. Thank you Tristan
On Jul 25, 2014, at 6:12 AM, Eric Wang <yiming.wang@oracle.com <mailto:yiming.wang@oracle.com>> wrote:
Hi Joe, alan and every one
I'm working on jaxp functional test colocation which is traced by the bug JDK-8043091 <https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8043091>. We have finished to convert a few suite and the jaxp/xpath tracked by bug JDK-8051561 <https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8051561> is the first one chosen for public review.
Can you please review the webrev below? your comments given would be helpful for our future work. http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~ewang/JDK-8051561/webrev.00/
Thanks, Eric
Hi Joe If you’re okay with the code; would you be my sponsor for this. We need move forward and push these tests into openjdk repo. Thank you so much Tristan
On Aug 29, 2014, at 11:21 AM, huizhe wang <huizhe.wang@oracle.com> wrote:
Hi Tristan,
Looks good. I left notes in the bug's comment section as a record and status of the original test development.
Thanks, Joe
On 8/29/2014 9:50 AM, Tristan Yan wrote:
Hi Joe, Alan and others I took over Eric’s last work and did some refactor for his code. Please help to review the code change again. webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~tyan/JDK-8051561/webrev.01/ <http://cr.openjdk.java.net/%7Etyan/JDK-8051561/webrev.01/> bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8051561 <https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8051561>
These code has been run with security manager and without security manager both and all passed. Thank you Tristan
On Jul 25, 2014, at 6:12 AM, Eric Wang <yiming.wang@oracle.com <mailto:yiming.wang@oracle.com>> wrote:
Hi Joe, alan and every one
I'm working on jaxp functional test colocation which is traced by the bug JDK-8043091 <https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8043091>. We have finished to convert a few suite and the jaxp/xpath tracked by bug JDK-8051561 <https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8051561> is the first one chosen for public review.
Can you please review the webrev below? your comments given would be helpful for our future work. http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~ewang/JDK-8051561/webrev.00/ <http://cr.openjdk.java.net/%7Eewang/JDK-8051561/webrev.00/>
Thanks, Eric
participants (8)
-
Alan Bateman
-
Eric Wang
-
Frank Yuan
-
huizhe wang
-
Joe Darcy
-
Michael Kay
-
roger riggs
-
Tristan Yan