Tool suggestion: JTReg test module dependencies verifier.

[Jonathan Gibbons]

No. This should not be a JEP.

JEPs are for enhancements to the Java platform.

-- Jon

On 03/29/2018 11:05 AM, Alexandre (Shura) Iline wrote:
> Jon, do you think I should start JEP for this tool?
>
> I think now is the right time.
>
> Shura
>
>> On Mar 28, 2018, at 12:05 PM, Jonathan Gibbons 
>> <jonathan.gibbons at oracle.com <mailto:jonathan.gibbons at oracle.com>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> On 03/28/2018 11:34 AM, Alexandre (Shura) Iline wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> On Mar 28, 2018, at 11:22 AM, Jonathan Gibbons 
>>>> <jonathan.gibbons at oracle.com <mailto:jonathan.gibbons at oracle.com>> 
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 3/28/18 10:57 AM, Alexandre (Shura) Iline wrote:
>>>>>> There's a 3rd (weaker?) category of "implementation desires", such as whether or not or how much this is integrated into jtreg.
>>>>> Correct, these are the non-functional requirements, of which at least one is missing right now:
>>>>> 2. The tool must use jdeps tool or jdeps API to perform test selection and test execution.
>>>> It's quibbling, but I don't think these are requirements. If jdeps 
>>>> or the jdeps API did not exist, you could still implement what you 
>>>> are proposing.  jdeps and the jdeps API are just technologies which 
>>>> you may elect to use to make your task simpler.
>>>
>>> Well, it must be a requirement to treat modules in a way compatible 
>>> with JDK. By requiring what I am requiring, I am guarantying that 
>>> and also, in addition, since I am strongly opposed to re-implement 
>>> what is already implemented in jdeps, this is my proposal for the 
>>> tool: it must use jdeps.
>>>
>>> Same, word for word, goes for JTReg, FWIW.
>>>
>>> Shura
>>>>
>>>> -- Jon
>>>
>>
>> I'm not against using jdeps, or jtreg. But there is a difference 
>> between a Requirement and an implementation choice. But this is just 
>> an email thread, and not any more formal document such as a CSR or 
>> JEP, so I'll not push on this any more.
>>
>> -- Jon
>