- David Williams: Y
- Naci Dai: N (Regrets)
- Raghunathan Srinivasan: Y
- Neil Hauge: Y
- Tim deBoer: Y
- Kaloyan Raev N (Regrets)
Reports, Actions, Issues
Architecture: Tim deBoer
- * Tim will draft and send inner-api policy soon.
Done. Please review new section in WTP_API_Policy
- * Tim will find out specific "advise to give developers (and auto-test teams)" to implement the WTP API policy (which tools/build reports to use).
- * Tim to implement "Java Doc Builds" for server tools, and make recommendations to other projects on how to
implement. I propose to pull current 'wst' and 'jst' javadoc bundles and let each sub-project to solve on
- It was agreed this was a reasonable "solution" (request, to project leads) ... some might be surprised ... but, was a resonable position.
- Recommended to restart the protected non-api scans.
- Will not accept new data, for now, but if tooling could be improved to detect/remove additional (non-protected) data, then perhaps it'd be useful to show non-api use going down.
- ** But, an update: Have discovered that current ones are nearly meaningless, since so much as
changed, so scan's show us as "changing protected API", but it's not protected API any longer.
- Concluded we should still run the scans, as sort of a "unit test" to see if any new, unexpected breakage. Run occasionally, that is, such as every milestone.
- We'll need to tell developers to "make use of as best they can" since it includes lots of noise.
- We may look at easy ways to reduce noise ... such as to "diff" with previous, or some reference report.
- It was suggested at some point we may want to put back on adopters to sanitize their data, but, that might still require more work on our part to make sure no new usage data was added.
Requirements: Raghu Srinivasan
- Do we need Draft release plan for the next release by June? (See see bug 215301).
- ** An Update on "standard plan format by June" ...
Rumor has it that the June deadline was to have a standard format decided, and the "infrastructure" in place to roll them up into a single roadmap document. The "real" plan is expected by September. My understanding was there would be a new note to this effect to "project leads list", but haven't seen it yet. But, suggest we ... Raghu? ... sort through the standard project plan format to see what we can/should do. I think the only question is if we want to have one WTP plan, and then produce the standard format from that (which would be my first thought) or literally have just one plan that happens to satisfy both needs.
Education: Naci Dai
** Need status update
- Phase 1, organize what we have, done by end January.
- Phase 2, self guided new materials. some available by EclipseCon.
- phase 3, shutdown .. scenarios
- Orgainizing "current" now, should be ready by EclipseCon.
- Will be organized better for narrowing selection and sorting.
- For now, the "database" will be one XML file, with various attributes/qualities to search and sort on.
Planning: David Williams
- We may need another 2.0.2 patch -- need to get developers to respond to JBoss use-case problems. (And, I've asked Naci to get involved.)
- Beginning Review Materials
- IP Log: third party code, list of committers, contributors
- Review: Other third party
- Good discussion. Raghu and Neil to tweak their sections some.
- Decided to add, somewhere, "we list these available options only to demonstrate there are lots of choices for the user, we do not advocate only these or any specific one"
- Decided we'd add Jetty to list of "used from platform" items.
- Discussed that the "installable runtimes" was a complex area, since some might argue it "encourages" certain usage over others. We could envision a day in the future where we might want to ask for some sort of Eclipse Review. Not for complete IP, probably, but, for example, maybe just to confirm the license presented to the user, from the URL provided, is a valid license, compatible with "use with" EPL, etc.
- We acknowledge there is an oddity in that Axis2 Runtime only has one choice, as far as we know. Don't see this as a practical problem since we believe users have the runtime first, and then look for tools to make better use of it, but ... we could envision that in future we may want to discuss more
- Who's to do API statements, deprecated statements?
Quality: Neil Hauge
- We will no longer have "old bug" focus items in status meetings, as we end this release, but will restart after the June release.
- Will now focus on "ramp down quality" in status meetings.
WTP User Experience Lead: Kaloyan Raev
- Working on "use cases" document, for novice user. Should be ready for public review and comments in a few weeks.
- Will be attending the UA Walk through meetings, and may propose a WTP one in future (perhaps on facets UI).
- * WTP Policy on "Committer Emeritus"?
- Other projects to watch:
- Potential resource issues?
- Product plugin for EPP and welcome screen
- Refactoring Doc features (and moving to appropriate sub-projects).
- Refactoring SDK (source and JavaDoc) features/bundles (and moving to appropriate sub-projects)
- Platform/OS coverage for testing and support? -- probably suffices to simply record coverage. Perhaps ask for community help.
- Performance Tests -- Kayolan making some progress.
- Needs some JSF features, at least for build
- No obvious resource solutions.
- Raghu: create a wiki page: a checklist for how to lower the barrier to participation for all projects
- David: create wiki page for 3rd-party requirements
- Naci (changed from David): post instructions and reminders for our "community resources" and presentations page, especially, even, for eclipseCon 2007, and Eclipse Summit
- 15022010, all: WTP Refactor follow up: Need to update website. Project Leads will need to take ownership of their own pages. See bug 201331
- David: Reorg CVS. See CVS Restructuring Proposal
- David: update our "planning" documents with dates for both Ganymede and Winter maintenance.
- David: Resolved WTP Policy on Package Visibility
- * Eclipse World deadline has passed (though they sometimes accept late submissions). Who has submitted?
Back to meeting list.
Please send any additions or corrections to David Williams.