Review request for JDK-8051540: Convert JAXP functin tests: org.xml.sax to jtreg (testNG) tests

huizhe wang at
Wed Oct 15 18:09:03 UTC 2014

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.

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.


> 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 < at 
>>>> < at>> 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
>>>>> <>
>>>> 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 < at 
>>>>>> < at>> 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 
>>>>>>>> < at < at>> wrote:

More information about the core-libs-dev mailing list