|[wtp-dev] Minutes for the WTP Status Telecon, 2005-11-10|
1. Review of Open Action Items  - Arthur Ryman
|115133||nor||P3||david_williams@xxxxxxxxxx||jeffliu@xxxxxxxxxx||NEW||---||[action] Discuss WTP migration with the PMC|
|113137||nor||P3||tbashor@xxxxxxx||jeffliu@xxxxxxxxxx||NEW||---||[action] Document the set of facets that we'll need for J2EE projects|
|114446||nor||P3||cbridgha@xxxxxxxxxx||jeffliu@xxxxxxxxxx||NEW||1.0 M10||[action] Open API requests for non-API usages in WTP|
|114914||nor||P3||syeshin@xxxxxxxxxx||jeffliu@xxxxxxxxxx||NEW||---||[action] Post some examples of what not to do for context help/infopop IDs|
|115141||nor||P3||jeffliu@xxxxxxxxxx||jeffliu@xxxxxxxxxx||NEW||---||[action] The API Scanner should be able to run from within the Eclipse workspace|
|115149||nor||P3||jeffliu@xxxxxxxxxx||jeffliu@xxxxxxxxxx||NEW||---||[action] We need to start doing scalability testings|
2. WTP 1.0 M9 Status - David Williams
Review bug backlog, builds,
and plans. Assign two teams to test in disconnected mode.
David - We are not in good shape to begin M9 week of testing. We have a few blocking bugs. Also, we still have some work items left for M9, for example, componentize JST.
David - Anyone else have issues they want to bring up for M9?
Larry - We unjarred some plugins and got them working last week. Now, they are unjarred, but with jarred content.
David - Could be related to the feature work.
Larry - Just checked today's build, everything seems to be ok now.
Chuck - I agree with David that we are not ready to start testing. Should we move the M9 candidate build out a few days?
Konstantin - Due to huge changes in M9 and the fact that we want to get feedback from ISV on these changes, I rather delay M9 a few days than moving work items to M10.
Chris - Pushing M9 out one week will make M10, which is already a short milestone, even shorter.
Ted - If we push the candidate driver out to next week, will we have someone to support the build given that we have the Thanksgiving holiday?
Chuck - Should we lock down what's goes in? Also, I'm a little worry about the JST componentization work.
Chris - Agree. We have two bugs related to JST componentization. One is already fixed, but the other is not. The second one may require a lot of work.
Chuck - These are valid changes, but now is probably not a good time to do it.
David - We can use workarounds for some of these bugs, for example, include the core plug-in in the UI feature. Let's get the features divided up, and use workarounds when needed.
David - Let's target by noon Wed next week, we'll produce a M9 candidate driver. First, let's get a list of items that we want to do by Tues next week. Then after M9, we'll start ramping down. M10 will mainly be bug fixes.
Konstantin - Two items. One is related to not giving runtime adaptor author not enough control. Two is splitting core/UI. These are the two API-ish items we want to fix for M9. And some UI usability improvement.
David - Componentize JST. We need to get the features divided up, we can use workarounds when necessary.
Other items from David's note:
1. Componitize JST feature. (As discussed, this does not mean fixing *all* the "misfits" this componentization has revealed,
e.g. some "core" plugins, will need to be in "ui" component features for Release 1.0. But .. the basic feature structure needs to be
2. Finish getting docs in builds. (This mostly depends on '1' above, but, some "new work" too).
3. Finish facet aware wizards (as per Chuck's note .. basics are in place .. but, needs to be finished).
4. web project "refactoring" ability (more than it sounds .. umbrella for 6 or 7 important items). Code is ready, needs to be submitted as
patch, built, and confirmed in build before full testing.
5. Extensible Runtime Bridge for facets ... a bit of a "hole" exposed by some "portal extenders". (Kosta and Tim are
near solution and API addition).
6. Facet Core/UI extension (sorry Kosta .. I missed details of this one .. but any thing that improves core/ui separation is critical, IMHO).
Konstantin - Does that mean we won't have an I-build this week?
Konstantin - My preference is to not produce one this week since we will test again next week.
Jeff - Can we make other bug fixes beside the work items mentioned previously?
David - Yes. You can put in bug fixes before the candidate build, no note is required. After candidate build, note to dev list.
Tim - Anything we can do to ensure Wed's build will be stable? How do we know we are progressing?
Chuck - We should continue to do testing on each build.
David - Yes, just that we do not need to formally report the results.
3. WTP 1.0 API Scans - Jeffrey Liu
Review API violations,
unit test and javadoc coverage
Jeff - Running out of time, will follow up with individual on getting complete unit test and javadoc coverage.
4. WTP 1.0 Performance - Jeffrey Liu
Jeff - Web services and J2EE are now converted to use the
new Eclipse message bundle.
Scalability testing - http://www.eclipse.org/webtools/development/performance/scalability_testing.php
Jeff - Will send a note to dev list describing what's being done.
5. WTP Features and Subsystems Status  - David Williams
David - We covered everything in the M9 status part.
6. Requirements Planning
 for WTP 1.5 - Jochen Krause
Jochen - Created the document. Really just a heads up.
Jochen - Any input, you can send it to me or the requirements mailing list.
Jochen - Let's start brainstorming for ideas now. Send ideas to me or the dev list. After WTP 1.0 is declared, we have to work on which requirement we can fullfill. We need to decide what are the committed work items and what are the nice to have items
7. Other Business -
IBM Rational Software - Performance Analyst
IBM Toronto Lab.
8200 Warden Ave. Markham, Ontario, L6G 1C7
Internal mail: D3/R8V/8200/MKM (D3-268)
T/L: 969 3531
Tel: (905) 413 3531
Fax: (905) 413 4920
Back to the top