"adrian(a)jboss.org" wrote : I'll bet the OSGi TCK is non-disclosure correct? So we need to make sure our | public tests are written "clean room", i.e. no copying of tests and | nobody that has seen the TCK tests writing similar public tests. | Sure, it's like all TCKs, non-disclosure all the way. Yup. Tests then become pita. I guess there is no way of bumping into duplicate effort. It should be the minimization of that duplication that we should work on. Or how to we handle this wtr to other TCKs? "adrian(a)jboss.org" wrote : | That's not to say that you can't raise a bug report describing the problem. ;-) | That harsh? Ouch. You can pretend that you didn't get that error info from tck. :-) "adrian(a)jboss.org" wrote : | I'd be happier porting the relevant eclipse or apache felix tests to our framework | before trying the TCK since those can be distributed under their relevant OS licenses. John? :-) View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4133343#... Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&a...