[wtp-pmc] Agenda for Tuesday, May 23rd, 2006 telecon
Call Info: 866-214-3176 or 404-827-9098.
Access code 8870689.
Call time: 7-8am PDT.
- Procedural Items
- Discuss options for providing
the 1.0 à 1.5
API change summary at http://www.eclipse.org/webtools/adopters/1.5APIdelta.html
and where/how to link it into the WTP site. David’s summary is the
only “non-empty” one I’ve received so far (see
1.5 / Callisto / RC3 status
- I would like to nominate
Craig Becker as a PMC member to represent the ATF project. Craig has
been attending our calls and effectively functioning in this role now
for several months, and is the obvious person to represent this
incubating project at the project leadership level.
- Contingent on a successful
move review Wednesday, I would like to nominate Neil Hauge as a PMC
member to represent the Dali sub-project. Neil has been serving in this
capacity for some time and adds another member company’s
perspective to the WTP PMC.
- Rampdown process discussion. There
seems to be general agreement among the component leads (expressed in
last week’s status call; see attached) that the rate of change is
too high to initiate our planned PMC approval process this week. Chris’
suggestion is to support “post review” for now. A revised
rampdown process might look like this:
- Now-5/31 (RC4) –
component lead checkin approval and “post hoc” PMC member review
- 6/1-6/10 (no milestone) –
same process (do we want to limit by priority/severity here?)
- 6/10-6/20 (RC5) – standard
(1.0.3-style) PMC pre-approval with “post hoc” approval by
- 6/21-6/28 (RC6) –
Emergency regression/Callisto-level issues only. PMC approval and x-team
notification required for any checkins.
- 6/28-6/30 (GA) –
release activities only; Callisto-wide freeze in place
- Discuss release review dates
- Discuss release review dates
- Clarify WTP-level requirements
for JSF and Dali release (versus incubation exit)
- Support tool (Arthur) –
see attached email thread for background
- Interesting discussion of
tracking bug-to-release-in-which-fix-is-planned on wtp-dev, but suggest
we defer it given the number of other topics for discussion today.
Craig Becker has been invited to the WTP PMC call to
Dali leadership (Shaun/Neil) has a standing invite through
incubation exit to join the calls.
wtp-pmc-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx on behalf of Krause, Jochen
Friday, May 19, 2006 7:41
WTP PMC communications (including coordination, announcements,
and Group discussions)Subject:
AW: [wtp-pmc] Fw: [wtp-dev] Minutes of
the WTP Status Telecon,2006-05-18Attachments:
+1 for Chris proposal
Tim, David, Jochen, Arthur, Naci and
Raghu, I was unable to attend the WTP
status meeting yesterday, but from a chat with Kathy and reading the minutes, I
understand the question of PMC approval for RC4 came up. I'm of much same opinion as Kosta's. At latest count, we
have 26 candidates for WTP 1.5, and 16 candidates for WTP 1.5.1 (and, FYI, we have started using the Status Whiteboard
field to track our candidates). I don't know whether this is a relatively large,
or small, number; however, the majority of these bugs are what I'd characterize
as usability and functional bugs that individually are not critical (most are
normal or major), but that collectively might leave the impression of
questionable quality - a subject of general concern. I don't want to suggest we abandon PMC approval entirely,
but don't relish the idea of a process involving a minimum 24-hour voting cycle
to get fixes into the build. My two cents' worth is for component leads to
judiciously approve bugs for commit/release, include appropriate impact/risk
assessments in the bugs, and have the PMC "post-approve" - meaning if the PMC
disagrees with a bug that has been committed/released - hopefully a rare case -
the component team in question can always reverse the fix. There are my thoughts on it for now. I'm out on vacation
until May 29, so in my absence, Kathy is acting component lead for Web
services. Thanks much,
Cheers - CB.
Advisory Technical Manager, Rational Java Web Services, IBM Canada
D3-275, D3/ENX/8200/MKM, 8200 Warden Avenue, Markham, Ontario, Canada,
cbrealey@xxxxxxxxxx, 905.413.6038, tieline:969.6038,
Forwarded by Chris Brealey/Toronto/IBM on 05/19/2006 10:07 AM -----
05/18/2006 03:52 PM
"General discussion of project-wide or architectural issues."
|"General discussion of project-wide
or architectural issues." <wtp-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
|[wtp-dev] Minutes of the WTP Status
See WTP Status Telecons  for more
Items - Lawrence Mandel
The following actions items showed some activity last week. 
3 bugs found.
The following action items are
currently open . Action items owners should update their status in Bugzilla prior to the
status telecon. Thx.
[action] Konstantin - document the workaround
in the bug and move it off the list. Also confirm that this problem will be
addressed in 2.0.
*note: this action does not have a corresponding bugzilla
2. WTP 1.0.3
Status - David Williams
David: I have not restarted the build. The build
will likely resume this weekend once RC3 is done. Naci and I have some changes
to make this Friday.
Ted: Are we planning to have an official 1.0.3 smoke
tested build each week?
David: I think we should do a weekly Ibuild with
smoke tests starting next week.
2.1 WTP 1.0.3 approved bugs  -
3. WTP 1.5
3.1 WTP 1.5 Build Status -
David: An RC3 candidate is available that
component teams should currently be smoke testing. There have been some small
doc changes since the build that will require a respin but there is no need to
smoke test again. Does anyone need a rebuild?
Chuck: We currently have lots
of exceptions when running our JUnit tests that have to do with validation jobs
closing before the tests are finished. Although this is not something users will
hit as the problems are with the tests themselves we've cleaned up a bunch of
the tests and would like to get them in. We'd also like to get another defect in
that fixes a problem with classpaths.
Keith: 140813 is a major regression. We
have a fix and are requesting a respin.
David: We will respin today. We'll
start the build at 5pm EST.
Kosta: The process for RC4 requires PMC approval
for fixing bugs. I don't think we're at that point yet. There are many more
quality bugs that need to be fixed.
Lawrence: I propose that component leads
discuss this with their teams and bring concerns to the PMC by sending mail to
wtp-pmc or joining the PMC call on Tuesday. This item will be added to next
week's PMC call.
3.2 WTP 1.5 Hot Bugs  -
3.3 WTP 1.5 Hot Bug Requests
 - Lawrence Mandel
3.4 P1 Bugs  - Lawrence
3.5 Blocking Bugs  -
3.6 Bugs to be Triaged  -
We're down to 72 bugs to triage (as of 1:05pm EST May 18, 2006).
Great work! Keep it up. There are still bugs that were opened over a year ago
that are assigned to
3.7 Bugs Targeted to Past
Milestones/Release Candidates  - Lawrence Mandel
There are currently 74 bugs targeted
to 1.5 M4, 1.5 M5, 1.5 M6, 1.5 RC1 and 1.5 RC2. These milestones and release
candidates have already been declared. Please retarget these bugs.
Kathy: WS currently uses M6 as a way of
identifying that changes should be made in 1.5 but that we do not know the
Lawrence: A target should only be assigned once the specific
milestone in known.
Tim: It appears that we intended to fix a lot of defects
in M6 but were unable to. I've also noticed a lot of bugs where the target is
simply rolled up on every milestone release.
David: There is a new field in
bugzilla called the "status whiteboard". This can be used for any information
your teams need to add to bugs for your own queries.
4. Other Business -
No other business.
IBM Rational Software
Phone: 905 - 413 - 3814 Fax: 905 -
413 - 4920
David M Williams [david_williams@xxxxxxxxxx]Sent:
Monday, May 22, 2006 10:04 AMTo:
Brealey; Chuck Bridgham; Craig Salter; Timothy Deboer; John Lanuti;
kchong@xxxxxxxxxx; Konstantin Komissarchik; lauzond@xxxxxxxxxx; Lawrence E
Dunnell; Lawrence Mandel; naci.dai@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; Nitin Dahyabhai; Arthur Ryman;
RE: 1.5 Release review - need your API summary
this weekTim, apologies for this very late
response, but suspect Chris summed up for most components ... in other words,
not much, if any, change in API, due to
the extended development time spent on 1.0.x stream and the desire to not
"break" adopters at the last minute. Component Leads, other than Chris, I have not seen any other notes on
this topic ... did you send them just to Tim directly? If so, please send us all a copy. In either case, even if
"no change", please send a reply note, just saying that, so we can be explicit.
And here's a few items, that
might help provide some interest to those reviewing the state of API in WTP.
1. The "navigator" framework that
was not API in WTP was officially moved and has become API in the base eclipse
ui component. (The WTP "internal"
navigator plugins have been removed). 2. The "tabbed property pages" that was not API in WTP was officially
moved and has become API in the base eclipse ui component. (The WTP "internal" tabbed properties pages have not been
removed, because one adopter said they could not yet migrate in a timely
way (they need some functionality that
was in the WTP version to also be migrated to the base version), so
we will keep these around as deprecated
until the WTP 2.0 (2007) release). 3. In the JSP Component, we added a "JSP - as - CSS" content type. This
is mostly for "tolerance" in WTP 1.5, so its not misinterpreted as JSP-HTML or JSP-XML, but adopters might have to be
aware that its no longer true that just because something is a "kind of" JSP,
that its automatically some form of HTML
or XML (with was true in WTP 1.0). 4. The SSE family of editors have added some partition types as "public"
API's, but we still need to add some more partition types in 2.0 release, so the exact behavior of "how a document
is partitioned" will change a little then, if anyone depends on exact details of
how documents are partitioned.
Hope this helps,
Duplicate copy (sent to the component leads directly).
Please note that we need to submit the slide deck by this Friday. Thanks.
05/16/2006 09:40 AM
<deboer@xxxxxxxxxx>, "Ted Bashor" <tbashor@xxxxxxx>,
"Konstantin Komissarchik" <kosta@xxxxxxx>, "Arthur Ryman"
<ryman@xxxxxxxxxx>, David M Williams/Raleigh/IBM@IBMUS, "Chris
Brealey" <cbrealey@xxxxxxxxxx>, Chuck
Bridgham/Raleigh/IBM@IBMUS, "Craig Salter"
<csalter@xxxxxxxxxx>, "Lawrence Mandel"
<lmandel@xxxxxxxxxx>, <naci.dai@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, John
Lanuti/Raleigh/IBM@IBMUS, Nitin Dahyabhai/Raleigh/IBM@IBMUS,
Lawrence E Dunnell/Redmond/IBM@IBMUS, <lauzond@xxxxxxxxxx>,
|RE: 1.5 Release review - need your
API summary this week|
From: Tim Wagner
Tuesday, May 16, 2006 7:36 AM
To: General discussion of project-wide
or architectural issues.
Subject: 1.5 Release review - need your API
summary this week
Importance: High WTP
devs, The PMC is preparing the 1.5 (aka Callisto) release review slides this
week in preparation for the public review of our 1.5 shipworthiness.
your help to compile a list of:
- New APIs introduced (or graduated out of
provisional status) since our 1.0.2 release. If they are densely packed in
some regions, you can summarize by class or package name.
- APIs removed versus *any* previous version
- If any conceptual (especially user- or
adopter-visible) features have been removed, please note those in
Please get these to me this week so that I can compile the
final version of the review slides and submit them to the EMO by Friday.
Thanks for your help,
wtp-pmc-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx on behalf of Arthur Ryman
Tuesday, May 16, 2006 8:15 AMTo:
WTP PMC communications (including coordination, announcements, and Group
WTP PMC communications (including coordination,
announcements, and Group discussions);
Re: [wtp-pmc] support Component
for the comments. You raise questions that I considered so it's worth discussing
the rationale. Yes, we should create
cvs and bugzilla components to avoid this code being mixed up with the releng
tools or tools that are actually part of WTP. The new component would be
WTP-wide but clearly separated, e.g. wtp.support. 1) I think the topic of support is very important so I
will assign an owner to it. We certainly have our fair share of bugs, and
anything we can do to help the problem diagnosis process is worth serious
consideration.The current contribution is a very small piece of code. We can ask
the contributor to maintain it and have a WTP committer act as the component
lead and mentor. 2) As we all know,
there are significant obstacles to starting new projects so the most cost
effective way to make this tool available for WTP support is to include it in
our project. WTP has a set of .options files and we should make it easy for
users to enable them. Support is a
topic of general interest and I would be in favour of moving any general purpose
tools into a common project. However, there are significant costs to starting up
new Eclipes projects. The way to get an Eclipse-wide project going is to show
the existence of useful tools, and then collect them into a common project once
a critical mass is available. The current contribution doesn't warrant the
creation of a new Eclipse project. On the other hand, we do have a collection of
WTP-specific .options and we should be making those easier to use. We should
also look at how well WTP components are using logging and other problem
determination aids, and expand the coverage as required. The current contribution was recommended to me by a
member of our internal support team. They found it useful and requested that WTP
have something like it. I then asked the author if he was willing to contribute
it and he agreed. So we have this simple tool available. As we discussed on the
call today, interested parties should evaluate it and comment on the bug.
 However, whether or not we like
this particular tool, we should start thinking more about the serviceability of
WTP. As more products adopt WTP, the issue of support will become more
IBM Software Group, Rational
+1-905-413-3077, TL 969-3077
assistant: +1-905-413-2411, TL 969-2411
+1-905-413-4920, TL 969-4920
mobile: +1-416-939-5063, text:
|David M Williams
Sent by: wtp-pmc-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
05/16/2006 12:09 AM
"WTP PMC communications (including coordination,
announcements, and Group discussions)"
|"WTP PMC communications (including
coordination, announcements, and Group discussions)"
|Re: [wtp-pmc] support Component in
Arthur, I assume you mean both bugzilla and cvs?
In either case, I'd prefer "not" .. for a couple of reasons,
1) is there
a long term developer-owner responsible for it? Normally, that's required to
propose a new component.
2) even if the answer to '1' is "yes", then I'd
suggest they form their own (opensource) project (either within their company,
or Eclipse, etc.,).
General purpose support tools, as this one is, is not
really within our WTP scope (or current resources) and sounds like it
useful to many others besides "WTP" specifically.
If you were just looking for
an existing bugzilla component to assign this to, then seems like the high level
WST one is fine.
If teams want to provide informal, unsupported debugging aides, they
can do that in a "development" directory of the component that owns it.
It does sound
like "support in general" could be worked into a full fledge top level
Eclipse project, if companies were interested in that,
but for the sake of
purity, it does not seem like "support tools" in general, is part of our WTP
05/15/2006 05:48 PM
"WTP PMC communications (including coordination,
announcements, and Group discussions)"
|[wtp-pmc] support Component in
been discussing support issues internally at IBM and we thought it might be a
good idea to provide aids for diagnosing WTP problems. This would help support
teams. For example, WTP uses .options files to control logging. A member of our
support team wrote on article  on helping users debug problems, and he
contributed a tool to us . I put this in releng, but I'd like to create a new
component called "support" for this purpose. Comments?
IBM Software Group,
phone: +1-905-413-3077, TL
assistant: +1-905-413-2411, TL 969-2411
fax: +1-905-413-4920, TL
mobile: +1-416-939-5063, text: 4169395063@xxxxxxx_______________________________________________