Bug 877055

Summary:	Seam 2.3 seam-gen generated project in JBDS has error in ActionTest, no return statement in createDeployment
Product:	[Retired] JBoss Enterprise WFK Platform 2	Reporter:	Ron Šmeral <rsmeral>
Component:	Seam	Assignee:	Marek Novotny <mnovotny>
Status:	CLOSED DUPLICATE	QA Contact:	Marek Schmidt <maschmid>
Severity:	medium	Docs Contact:
Priority:	unspecified
Version:	2.1.0	CC:	amelicha, irooskov, kpiwko
Target Milestone:	---
Target Release:	2.2.0
Hardware:	Unspecified
OS:	Unspecified
Whiteboard:	Seam 2.3 seam-gen
Fixed In Version:		Doc Type:	Bug Fix
Doc Text:		Story Points:	---
Clone Of:		Environment:
Last Closed:	2012-11-20 15:44:57 UTC	Type:	Bug
Regression:	---	Mount Type:	---
Documentation:	---	CRM:
Verified Versions:		Category:	---
oVirt Team:	---	RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team:	---	Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:

Description Ron Šmeral 2012-11-15 15:42:48 UTC

Description of problem:
If a seam-gen generated project with a seam-gen generated action is imported into JBDS, it reports a problem in the test for the action, because the createDeployment method has the return statement commented out.

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
WFK 2.1.0.CR2 jboss-seam-2.3.0.Final-redhat-1, JBDS 5.0.1.GA

How reproducible:
Import a seam-gen generated project into JBDS.

Steps to Reproduce:
1. seam create-project new-action 
2. Import into JBDS.
  
Actual results:
JBDS problem (error):
  This method must return a result of type WebArchive	CompTest.java	/testprojectEAR/src/test/com/mydomain/testprojectEAR/test	line 19	Java Problem

Expected results:
No errors.

Comment 4 mark yarborough 2012-11-19 14:47:13 UTC

Move to WFK 2.2 and release note for WFK 2.1 per 19-Nov triage call.

Comment 5 Marek Schmidt 2012-11-20 15:44:57 UTC


*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 877063 ***

Comment 6 Marek Schmidt 2012-11-21 16:21:11 UTC

This duplicate issue should not contain release notes. The current text is wrong anyway, more accurate description is in the BZ#877063 (of which this issue is a duplicate)