From the spec (assertion numbers need to be added):

Object newInstance(Class persistenceCapable);

A12.6.6-1 [The parameter must be one of the following:

• an abstract class that is declared in the metadata as persistence-capable, in which all abstract methods are declared as persistent properties, or
• an interface that is declared in the metadata as persistence-capable, in which all methods are declared as persistent properties, or
• a concrete class that is declared in the metadata as persistence-capable. In this case, the concrete class must declare a public no-args constructor.

If the parameter does not satisfy the above requirements, JDOUserException is thrown.]
...
A12.6.6-2 [In order for the newInstance method to be used, the parameter interface must be completely mapped. For relational implementations, the interface must be mapped to a table and all persistent properties must be mapped to columns. Additionally, interfaces that are the targets of all relationships from persistent properties must also be mapped. Otherwise, JDOUserException is thrown by the newInstance method.]

Some simple positive tests with supporting pc classes and metadata was checked in (revision: 526946). There are issues for which other JIRAs will be filed.
).

Please review.

I couldn't find the *_bad.java classes in the attachment. I'm expecting that the comments in the class and mapping will further explain why they are not valid classes for the newInstance method.

New patch containing *_bad.java

Just one comment. This code in AAddress_bad seems to be superfluous:
+ /** This is the JDO-required no-args constructor. The TCK relies on
+ * this constructor for testing PersistenceManager.newInstance(PCClass).
+ */
+ public Address_bad(String street, String city, String state, String zipcode)

+
+ // pm.newInstance(this) throws JDOUserException with non-public constructor
+ private Address_bad() {}
+
I think all you need is

+ // pm.newInstance(this) throws JDOUserException with non-public no-args constructor
+ private Address_bad() {}
+

Previous patches lacked test newInstanceBadMapping.java and the associated mapping files org/apache/jdo/tck.pc/newInstance/package-standard1.orm

Some minor formatting issues and typos in comments. Otherwise, good to go.

Per discussion on JDO-559, I will remove tests in NewInstanceBadMapping and test for impl throwing JDOUserException with a persistent interface having a method that is not a property and an abstract class having an abstract method that is not a property.

Complete with Revision: 604247

I didn't notice until just now that the spec is inconsistent.

In 12.6.6,
an abstract class that is declared in the metadata as persistence-capable, in which all abstract methods are persistent properties, or
an interface that is declared in the metadata as persistence-capable, in which all methods are persistent properties, or...
If the parameter does not satisfy the above requirements, JDOUserException is thrown.

But in 18.3,
Persistent properties declared in the interface are defined as those that have both a get and a set method or both an is and a set method, named according to the JavaBeans naming conventions, and of a type supported as a persistent type.
The implementing class will provide a suitable implementation for all property access methods and will throw JDOUserException for all other methods of the interface.

We need to clean up one or the other.

Need to update tck2-legacy

Merged changes to tck2-legacy. Completed: At revision: 609039