[
Date Prev][
Date Next][
Thread Prev][
Thread Next][
Date Index][
Thread Index]
[
List Home]
|
RE: [cosmos-dev] Fw: Request approval for bug fixes
|
Hubert,
+1 if Sheldon reviews and agrees.
Don
________________________________
From: cosmos-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:cosmos-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Hubert H Leung
Sent: Thursday, April 24, 2008 6:18 PM
To: Cosmos Dev
Subject: RE: [cosmos-dev] Fw: Request approval for bug fixes
Hi Don,
In i10, a goal is to make sure the CMDBf request and response message
comply to the standard, including the fault messages in case of
exceptions. I need this bug fix to meet this expectation. (IBM adopters
will beat me down if I don't fix it.) It won't affect QA activities
because the QA team does not test exceptions and they don't look at the
content of the SOAP messages.
I have test cases that look at the SOAP message across the wire. The
code change is isolated to the way the fault message is created. It will
only affect the cases when there are errors on the server. I will ask
Sheldon to review my code to make sure it is a good fix.
Thanks,
_________________________
Hubert Leung
IBM Toronto Lab
hkyleung@xxxxxxxxxx
905-413-3382
"Ebright, Don" <Don.Ebright@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
"Ebright, Don"
<Don.Ebright@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent by: cosmos-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
04/24/2008 05:42 PM
Please respond to
Cosmos Dev <cosmos-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
To
"Cosmos Dev" <cosmos-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
cc
Subject
RE: [cosmos-dev] Fw: Request approval for bug fixes
Hubert,
Sorry for the delayed response, but my mailbox was completely snowed
under today to the point that I wasn't able to send any outgoing mail.
In general, I agree with Jimmy on 228498, 228441, and 228293 but I think
that I disagree about 228449. We shouldn't commit anything that could
jeapordize the QA schedule at this point so I would like to better
understand the impact of not fixing this one and the nature of the risks
before agreeing to proceed with 228449.
I also agree that the other four can wait. If anyone has a serious need
for any of them, please speak up on the mailing list prior to noon
tomorrow.
Don
The contents of this e-mail are intended for the named addressee only.
It contains information that may be confidential. Unless you are the
named addressee or an authorized designee, you may not copy or use it,
or disclose it to anyone else. If you received it in error please notify
us immediately and then destroy it.
From: cosmos-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [
mailto:cosmos-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Mohsin, Jimmy
Sent: Thursday, April 24, 2008 5:12 PM
To: Cosmos Dev
Subject: RE: [cosmos-dev] Fw: Request approval for bug fixes
Importance: High
MY $.02....
228498 - APPROVED
228449 - APPROVED
228441 - APPROVED
228293 - APPROVED
Rest can wait....
Thanks,
Jimmy Mohsin
Cell +1-609-635-1703
From: cosmos-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [
mailto:cosmos-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Hubert H Leung
Sent: Thursday, April 24, 2008 3:56 PM
To: cosmos-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [cosmos-dev] Fw: Request approval for bug fixes
Resending with request template.
Don, Jimmy or Mark, please approve.
I have not arranged for code review for my fixes. I don't think it's
required at this stage. I answer N/A to that question.
======================================================
I am requesting approval for fixing the following bugs:
228498 Wed 15:28 nor P1 sadravid@xxxxxxxxxx hkyleung@xxxxxxxxxx NEW i10
Link to install page is incorrect in InstallGuide.txt
- the build team will make this change. The install guide has a link to
the i9 wiki page. It needs to be changed to i10.
1. Explain why you believe this is a stop-ship defect. How does the
defect manifest itself, and how will users of COSMOS / consuming
products be affected if the defect is not fixed?
Install guide has to be accurate.
2. Is there a work-around? If so, why do you believe the work-around is
insufficient?
no workaround
3. Is this a regression or API breakage? Explain.
the file need to change every iteration.
4. Does this require new API?
no
5. Who performed the code review?
N/A
6. Is there a test case attached to the bugzilla record?
N/A
7. What is the risk associated with this fix?
no risk
8. Is this fix related to any standards that COSMOS adheres to? If so,
who has validated that the fix continues to adhere to the standard?
no
228449 Wed 11:57 maj P1 hkyleung@xxxxxxxxxx hkyleung@xxxxxxxxxx NEW i10
Problems with Fault creation code
- must fix because the fault generation code has wrong behavior, fix in
hand.
1. Explain why you believe this is a stop-ship defect. How does the
defect manifest itself, and how will users of COSMOS / consuming
products be affected if the defect is not fixed?
The fix is required to make the implementation spec-compliant.
2. Is there a work-around? If so, why do you believe the work-around is
insufficient?
no
3. Is this a regression or API breakage? Explain.
no
4. Does this require new API?
no
5. Who performed the code review?
N/A
6. Is there a test case attached to the bugzilla record?
I have junit test cases for testing faults. But they are not attached
with the bug.
7. What is the risk associated with this fix?
medium
8. Is this fix related to any standards that COSMOS adheres to? If so,
who has validated that the fix continues to adhere to the standard?
CMDBf
228441 Use local copy of schema
1. Explain why you believe this is a stop-ship defect. How does the
defect manifest itself, and how will users of COSMOS / consuming
products be affected if the defect is not fixed?
- mustfix because referencing a remote schema may cause timeout issues
under some network conditions
- change WSDL to reference local schema, avoid network timeout problems.
- affects toolkit
2. Is there a work-around? If so, why do you believe the work-around is
insufficient?
Yes, but we should make it work out of the box.
3. Is this a regression or API breakage? Explain.
no
4. Does this require new API?
no
5. Who performed the code review?
N/A
6. Is there a test case attached to the bugzilla record?
The fix can be verified by the basic end-to-end scenario.
7. What is the risk associated with this fix?
low
8. Is this fix related to any standards that COSMOS adheres to? If so,
who has validated that the fix continues to adhere to the standard?
CMDBf. The WSDL that's downloaded from cmdbf.org references the schema
using http protocol. That line need to be change to reference a local
schema file which is downloaded from cmdbf without modification.
228293 Error code of CMDBf Query Error should be "Receiver"
- very simple change - just a change of a constant. Affect spec
conformance
1. Explain why you believe this is a stop-ship defect. How does the
defect manifest itself, and how will users of COSMOS / consuming
products be affected if the defect is not fixed?
Not a stop-ship. But it's a very simple fix and it will make the
implementation compliant with the CMDBf spec. So I recommend fixing it.
2. Is there a work-around? If so, why do you believe the work-around is
insufficient?
no.
3. Is this a regression or API breakage? Explain.
no
4. Does this require new API?
no
5. Who performed the code review?
N/A
6. Is there a test case attached to the bugzilla record?
I have a junit test for it.
7. What is the risk associated with this fix?
low
8. Is this fix related to any standards that COSMOS adheres to? If so,
who has validated that the fix continues to adhere to the standard?
CMDBf
228514 16:35:49 nor P1 hkyleung@xxxxxxxxxx hkyleung@xxxxxxxxxx NEW i10
ConfigDemo program should not move BIRT file if the BIRT zip could not
be unzipped
- A step in the configuration should not be executed if the BIRT zip
file could not be unzipped for any reason. It's a simple fix. Fix in
hand.
1. Explain why you believe this is a stop-ship defect. How does the
defect manifest itself, and how will users of COSMOS / consuming
products be affected if the defect is not fixed?
Not a stop ship, but a low risk fix.
2. Is there a work-around? If so, why do you believe the work-around is
insufficient?
no
3. Is this a regression or API breakage? Explain.
no
4. Does this require new API?
no
5. Who performed the code review?
N/A
6. Is there a test case attached to the bugzilla record?
no, but it will be easy to verify
7. What is the risk associated with this fix?
low
8. Is this fix related to any standards that COSMOS adheres to? If so,
who has validated that the fix continues to adhere to the standard?
no
228700 11:48:51 nor P1 hkyleung@xxxxxxxxxx hkyleung@xxxxxxxxxx NEW i10
add copyrights
- A few files I own are missing copyrights. very low risk
1. Explain why you believe this is a stop-ship defect. How does the
defect manifest itself, and how will users of COSMOS / consuming
products be affected if the defect is not fixed?
It's not a functional bug. It's to comply with legal requirements.
2. Is there a work-around? If so, why do you believe the work-around is
insufficient?
no
3. Is this a regression or API breakage? Explain.
no
4. Does this require new API?
no
5. Who performed the code review?
N/A
6. Is there a test case attached to the bugzilla record?
N/A
7. What is the risk associated with this fix?
low
8. Is this fix related to any standards that COSMOS adheres to? If so,
who has validated that the fix continues to adhere to the standard?
no
228463 Wed 13:18 nor P3 hkyleung@xxxxxxxxxx hkyleung@xxxxxxxxxx NEW i10
Set default SOAP version to 1.1
- need a method to set client to use soap 1.1 or 1.2. set default to 1.1
1. Explain why you believe this is a stop-ship defect. How does the
defect manifest itself, and how will users of COSMOS / consuming
products be affected if the defect is not fixed?
not a stop ship. I need this capabilities when writing test cases. And
it's a useful feature to provide.
2. Is there a work-around? If so, why do you believe the work-around is
insufficient?
no
3. Is this a regression or API breakage? Explain.
no
4. Does this require new API?
yes
5. Who performed the code review?
N/A
6. Is there a test case attached to the bugzilla record?
I have junits that test with the two versions of SOAP messages.
7. What is the risk associated with this fix?
low
8. Is this fix related to any standards that COSMOS adheres to? If so,
who has validated that the fix continues to adhere to the standard?
no
==============================
The following bug need to be fixed, but I'm looking for a solution:
228294 Unable to set fault code to "sender"
- The fault code is always set to "Reciever". I'm still investigating
the reason.
Thanks,
_________________________
Hubert Leung
IBM Toronto Lab
hkyleung@xxxxxxxxxx
905-413-3382
_______________________________________________
cosmos-dev mailing list
cosmos-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cosmos-dev
