FW: [alf-dev] ALF Source CodeMangementVocabularyMeeting+1-303-928-3232 i

["Tim Buss" <TBuss@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Sorry for the late notice but I was unable to successfully post email to
this address yesterday
Tim

-----Original Message-----
From: Tim Buss 
Sent: Tuesday, October 03, 2006 10:38 PM
To: 'alf-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx'
Subject: RE: [alf-dev] ALF Source
CodeMangementVocabularyMeeting+1-303-928-3232 id 6053141#
Wednesday10:00AM PDT

There will be a ALF Source Code Management Vocabulary Meeting this week,
Wednesday Oct 4th at 10:00AM PDT

The call in number is

+1-303-928-3232 id 6053141#

as usual.

Agenda
0. Last meeting's minutes (below)

1. Status on tasks (see list in minutes below)

2. Discuss issues raised concerning SCM vocab
http://wiki.eclipse.org/index.php/Talk:ALF/SCM_Vocabulary

4. "Callback" idea update
BPEL supports this directly via the notion of Correlation set.  The way
this appears to work is that, in BPEL, you identify message elements
that will identify the BPEL process instance uniquely.  When a message
is received the BPEL engine will look for a process definition that
matches the message.  Specifically it looks for a <receive> or
equivalent activity that is expecting a message of this type.  If there
is a running process instance where the particular message element
values match those registered with the <receive> the message is sent to
that specific instance.  To make this convenient to use, either the
service would need to provide a unique id that it will only use with
this instance of the service flow or the service flow will need to
provide the service with a unique id that the service can return or
both.  The service flow would seem the most likely candidate.  There are
various options that provide some flexibility as to what can be used to
define the correlation set.  For us it would probably make sense to com
up with some guidelines that make it easy to support. (eg: one id that
is unique per service flow and is structure in the same place in the
same structure wherever it is used.) What is still unclear is whether
this mechanism can be indirected through the event manager such that the
"callback" can just be an event but with a special identifier value that
allows it hook up to the running service flow instance.  This seems
possible but would need to be prototyped.
Another issue is that that while standard, this is fairly "advanced"
BPEL feature and may not be supported by the less mature open source
engines.  ActiveBPEL and Oracle both support it. 

3. Any other business


Tim Buss - Serena.        

-----Original Message-----
From: Tim Buss
Sent: Wednesday, September 27, 2006 12:15 PM
To: 'ALF Developer Mailing List'
Subject: RE: [alf-dev] ALF Source
CodeMangementVocabularyMeeting+1-303-928-3232 id 6053141#
Wednesday10:00AM PDT - meeting minutes

Meeting minutes for  ALF Source Code Management Vocabulary Meeting this
week, Wednesday Sept 27th at 10:00AM PDT

Attendees
Adam Simatel
Brian Caroll
Tim Buss
Robert Reising

Agenda
0. Last meetings's minutes (below)

1. Status on tasks (see list in minutes below)

2. Any other business

0. Last meetings's minutes.  Last weeks minutes were accepted

1. Tasks
DONE
T23 Define SCM events XML
Assigned to Tim.  A draft has been presented and is available in the
wiki

TODO
T19
Wiki pictures.  There are some placeholders for pictures in the Wiki.
These need to be populated.  In particular it would be good to get the
updated data model into the Wiki

T24 Refine and Normalize Operations so they work as a coherent set
Assigned to you.  Please provide feedback Richard Title and Adam
Simantel will take a look at this

T25 Reflect Operation refinements in Schema and WSDL Assigned to Tim Tim
is waiting for feedback

T26 Discuss dynamic "Callback" idea
A point was raise that perhaps raising an ALF Event for every
asynchronous action completion may be too heavyweight.  An alternative
using a dynamic callback service passed with the operation was
suggested.  This would probably take the form of an ALF event in
definition but would connect back to the calling instance of the service
flow directly.  The removes the need to create new service flow instance
and simplifies data correlation in some cases.
It was suggested we need a proposal to discuss (see T28)

T27. ALF SCM vocabulary Eclipse WTP "stub" project Mark is going to take
a look at doing this.  We may need to refine the schema and WSDL before
we do that since the current version is not completely valid.

T28.  Define and prototype "callback mechanism"
Tim Buss committed to defining this mechanism for discussion

T29.  Define return values and faults

T30.  POC use case candidates.
We agreed it would be useful to implement one or more POCs based on the
various SCM schemas/WSDLs.  There may be some benefit in trying to do
this before we start any parallel work trying to wrap real products.
T24 seems important to complete before we start codeing in parallel. 
Adam Simantel will suggest a use case for the POC

3. Any Other Business
Liya Jan has provided some feedback on the SCM vocabulary (see
attached).  I have added these comments to the discussion section of the
SCM wikki page.
http://wiki.eclipse.org/index.php/Talk:ALF/SCM_Vocabulary. Please review
and we will discuss it next week.


Attendance has been light and the summer holiday excuse no longer
applies :)

Tim Buss - Serena.       
 

-----Original Message-----
From: Tim Buss
Sent: Tuesday, September 26, 2006 5:04 PM
To: 'ALF Developer Mailing List'
Subject: RE: [alf-dev] ALF Source
CodeMangementVocabularyMeeting+1-303-928-3232 id 6053141#
Wednesday10:00AM PDT - meeting minutes

There will be a ALF Source Code Management Vocabulary Meeting this week,
Wednesday Sept 27th at 10:00AM PDT

The call in number is

+1-303-928-3232 id 6053141#

as usual

Agenda
0. Last meetings's minutes (below)

1. Status on tasks (see list in minutes below)

2. Any other business


Tim Buss - Serena.        

-----Original Message-----
From: Tim Buss
Sent: Wednesday, September 06, 2006 11:02 AM
To: 'ALF Developer Mailing List'
Subject: RE: [alf-dev] ALF Source
CodeMangementVocabularyMeeting+1-303-928-3232 id 6053141#
Wednesday10:00AM PDT - meeting minutes

Meeting minutes for  ALF Source Code Management Vocabulary Meeting this
week, Wednesday Sept 6th at 10:00AM PDT

Attendees
Adam Simatel
Richard Title
Eric Minnick
Tim Buss
Brian Caroll

Agenda
0. Last meetings's minutes (below)

1. Status on tasks (see list in minutes below)

2. Declaring events (since attendence was low last week)

3. Any other business

0. Last meetings's minutes.  Last weeks minutes were accepted

1. Tasks
DONE
T23 Define SCM events XML
Assigned to Tim.  A draft has been presented and is available in the
wiki

TODO
T19
Wiki pictures.  There are some placeholders for pictures in the Wiki.
These need to be populated.  In particular it would be good to get the
updated data model into the Wiki

T24 Refine and Normalize Operations so they work as a coherent set
Assigned to you.  Please provide feedback

T25 Reflect Operation refinements in Schema and WSDL Assigned to Tim Tim
is waiting for feedback

T26 Discuss dynamic "Callback" idea
A point was raise that perhaps raising an ALF Event for every
asynchronous action completion may be too heavyweight.  An alternative
using a dynamic callback service passed with the operation was
suggested.  This would probably take the form of an ALF event in
definition but would connect back to the calling instance of the service
flow directly.  The removes the need to create new service flow instance
and simplifies data correlation in some cases.

T27. ALF SCM vocabulary Eclipse WTP "stub" project Mark is going to take
a look at doing this.  We may need to refine the schema and WSDL before
we do that since the current version is not completely valid.

T28.  Define and prototype "callback mechanism"

T29.  Define return values and faults

T30.  POC use case candidates.
We agreed it would be useful to implement one or more POCs based on the
various SCM schemas/WSDLs.  There may be some benefit in trying to do
this before we start any parallel work trying to wrap real products.
T24 seems important to complete before we start codeing in parallel. 

2. Declaring events
The event Schema/WSDL was presented again to a broader audience.
Feedback is awaited.

3. Any Other Business
The importance of getting a more stable draft of the the SCM vocab was
stressed.

There will no meeting next week (13th Sep).  A meeting the following
week (20th) is TBD since Tim Buss will be away.

Tim Buss - Serena.       

-----Original Message-----
From: Tim Buss
Sent: Tuesday, September 05, 2006 10:08 PM
To: 'ALF Developer Mailing List'
Subject: RE: [alf-dev] ALF Source
CodeMangementVocabularyMeeting+1-303-928-3232 id 6053141#
Wednesday10:00AM PDT - meeting minutes

Agenda
0. Last meetings's minutes (below)

1. Status on tasks (see list in minutes below)

2. Declaring events (schema to follow)

3. Any other business

Attendees
Brian Caroll
Adam Simatel
Tim Buss

0. Last meetings's minutes.  The minutes were accepted

1. Status on tasks (see list in minutes below) Done

TODO
T19
Wiki pictures.  There are some placeholders for pictures in the Wiki.
These need to be populated.  In particular it would be good to get the
updated data model into the Wiki

T23 Define SCM events XML
Assigned to Tim.  A draft was presented

T24 Refine and Normalize Operations so they work as a coherent set
Assigned to you.  Please provide feedback

T25 Reflect Operation refinements in Schema and WSDL Assigned to Tim Tim
is waiting for feedback

T26 Discuss dynamic "Callback" idea
A point was raise that perhaps raising an ALF Event for every
asynchronous action completion may be too heavyweight.  An alternative
using a dynamic callback service passed with the operation was
suggested.  This would probably take the form of an ALF event in
definition but would connect back to the calling instance of the service
flow directly.  The removes the need to create new service flow instance
and simplifies data correlation in some cases.

T27. ALF SCM vocabulary Eclipse WTP "stub" project Mark is going to take
a look at doing this.  We may need to refine the schema and WSDL before
we do that since the current version is not completely valid.

T28.  Define and prototype "callback mechanism"

T29.  Define return values and faults

2. Event declaration schema
The event declaration schema was discussed.  The main issues with it is
that it is more complex than we would like and maybe more challenging to
create than we would like.  Two approaches were suggested.
	a) Tools could provide some additional non schema based xml to
describe the various valid event field combinations.  This has some
appeal since the obvious format for this would be an ALF event map
fragment (without the service flows).  This is certainly easier to read
than the schema but has the glaring ommission of describing what
vocabulary of tool specific data comes with the event
	b) ALF could, at some future date, provide a tool to generate
the Event declaration schema.


3. Any other business
No other business was discussed

Tim Buss - Serena.      

**********************************************************************
This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message.