Re: Re: Upcoming new test-suite release

Julian Mehnle ha scritto:
> Stefano Bagnara wrote:
>> IMHO it is bad for OpenSPF to fail to tell how implementations can be
>> listed between compliant implementation and ignore anyone but your own
>> implementations.
> 
> As Stuart said, this isn't in any way due to a desire for self-promotion.  
> The reason that the website still says "The jSPF library is currently 
> being evaluated by the project for RFC 4408 compliance" simply is that 
> when I tried to run the (offline) test-suite against jSPF over a year 
> ago, it was very complicated to get it to work for someone who isn't an 
> experienced Java/Maven developer, and that the generated output was 
> practically unreadable, and no one else capable of editing the website 
> has since tried checking out jSPF's compliance.  I admit that it was my 
> fault not to have announced that I had given up on trying to get useful 
> output from my jSPF test-suite runs, and hadn't asked that someone else 
> give it a try.

Probably running java applications is difficult for you as running perl 
applications for me.
How easy is for me (let's say I only understand java) to run the 
testsuite for other implementations?? Hard. It's not jSPF that is hard, 
it is simply that the test suite for a library is usually written in the 
library own language and using that very language testing methodologies.
We use jUnit and we wrapped the yaml tests into jUnit tests, so it is 
really easy to run our test suite graphically in any jUnit compatible 
environment.

> So please don't be mad, but let's now try to get this resolved instead.

My complain is that either you publish a procedure that I will try to 
follow or you say that jSPF is compliant. It doesn't work and it's not 
fair for me that you say "I don't know Java so your implementation will 
not be listed".

Stefano