Closed jhanders34 closed 2 years ago
I don't think I have enough experience in this area to do a full review. My main concern is with the number of items that changed names/ids to add
servlet
in order to distinguish from the newrest
related items. Will those name/id changes affect the end user? An alternative would be to leave the existing ones as is and let the newrest
related ones have the more specific name/id.
The name/id changes are just test related configuration. A user can name their names and ids any name they want as long as they are unique to the type.
Arquillian PR created now: https://github.com/arquillian/arquillian-core/pull/407 with the same content as the liberty rest protocol except with the org.jboss package prefix instead of io.openliberty. The tests pass with the content of the arquillian PR's rest protocol as well.
I suggest focusing on the liberty managed and remote projects since the arquillian rest protocol implementation will be provided by arquillian eventually.
Just wanted to mention that the dependencies bundle will probably need updating after these changes. https://github.com/OpenLiberty/arquillian-liberty-dependencies
Short description of what this resolves:
Today liberty arquillian has a servlet dependency in order to run a test on the application server. To test functions like CDI and RESTful Web Services that do not require servlet, this is not suitable since MicroProfile and now Core Profile in Jakarta EE 10 does not require the application server to expose servlet API and function in applications. This PR provides a way to run a test on a server that does not have servlet enabled by using a RESTful Web Services resource instead.
Changes proposed in this pull request:
Fixes: #113