| [higgins-dev] Notes for Higgins dev call on November 1st |
There were a few more dial-in line beeps after I finished role call. Let me know if you were on the call and I missed your name. Attendees Alex Amies - IBM * Charles Andres - Parity Paula Austel - IBM Anthony Bussani - IBM Jeff Broberg CA Andy Hodgkinson - Novell Duane Buss - Novell * Greg Byrd - NCSU/IBM * Brian Carrol - Serena Tom Doman - Novell *Jeesmon Jacob - Parity * Valery Kokhan - Parity Ukraine David Kuehr-Mclaren - IBM * Mike McIntosh - IBM *Tony Nadalin - IBM Nataraj Nagaratnam - IBM Dale Olds - Novell Drummond Reed - Cordance Bruce Rich - IBM * Mary Ruddy - Parity/SocialPhysics * Markus Sabedello - Parity Jim Sermersheim - Novell Uppili Srinivasan - Oracle * Jim Miles George Stanchev - Serena Daniel Sanders - Novell * Paul Trevithick - Parity/SocialPhysics Igor Tsinman - Parity Lex Sheehan *Brian Walker - Parity -- * Present Regrets: Jim Sermersheim Agenda ====== 1) Status of 1.0M9 Build - All components building successfully 2) Status of 1.0M9 Build Enhancements (see [1]) - Light/unlight LEDs Components page [208421] --waiting on Eclipse webmaster - Tagged nightly builds [208429] --finishing development & tested today - Tagged stable builds [208430] --under development 3) Newly Entered Bugs. Need to triage. Assigned to MikeM: - https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=206358 Cancel and Validate for SAML - https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=207591 Need a way to configure which MEX file corresponds to ... - https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=207639 XMLHelper.toDOM looses characters when non-english - https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=207669 Add messages to Components page - https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=208049 STS Client Threading issue: Username tokens Newly entered from Barcelona interop. Assigned to MaximK for now: - https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=208318 All Higgins versions failed to work with Fu Gen RP - https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=208320 2 IC-Ruby RP fails with all Higgins versions - https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=208321 I2 Bandit Podcast RP doesn't work with Higgins HBX - https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=208323 I2 IC-C RP fails with Higgins; works with Cardspace - https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=208324 I2 Shibboleth RP fails with Higgins HBX - https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=208325 2 WSO2-IS RP doesn't work with Higgins Selector - https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=208326 I2 WSO2-IS Java RP doesn't work with Higgins HBX - https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=208327 Higgins Selector Fails with MS Relying Parties - https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=208329 MS Any Issuer RP fails with HBX; works with Bandit, Eclipse.. - https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=208330 HBX fails with RP; other Higgins Selectors work OK - https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=208315 4) Overall 1.0 Bug total: 82 (not including the above) Please review [2] 5) Tony: Schedule for RP code contribution/merge 6) Tony: Schedule for Eclipse-based Selector code contribution 7) Selector Selector Summit 8) IIW interop/demo planning 9) We will have a special 30 minute agenda item for our November 8th call on "safe browsing" - discussions that have been happening in the W3C WSC TC. [1] http://wiki.eclipse.org/Higgins_Wiki#Build.2FDeploy_Related [2] https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/buglist.cgi?query_format=advanced&short_desc_t ype=allwordssubstr&short_desc=&product=Higgins&target_milestone=1.0&long_des c_type=allwordssubstr&long_desc=&bug_file_loc_type=allwordssubstr&bug_file_l oc=&status_whiteboard_type=allwordssubstr&status_whiteboard=&keywords_type=a llwords&keywords=&bug_status=NEW&bug_status=ASSIGNED&bug_status=REOPENED&ema iltype1=substring&email1=&emailtype2=substring&email2=&bugidtype=include&bug _id=&votes=&chfieldfrom=&chfieldto=Now&chfieldvalue=&cmdtype=doit&order=Reus e+same+sort+as+last+time&field0-0-0=noop&type0-0-0=noop&value0-0-0= 1) Status of 1.0M9 Build Paul: My understanding is that components are building successfully. Does anyone know differently? Mike: Everything is okay except for the WAR for the STS. The WAR isn't being move to the downloads area. Paul: Is Peter working on this? Valery: Yes Mike: I don't think we have made the branch for 1.0M9 yet. Paul: Correct. We will get back to this topic. 2) Status of 1.0M9 Build Enhancements (see [1]) - Light/unlight LEDs Components page [208421] --waiting on Eclipse webmaster - Tagged nightly builds [208429] --finishing development & tested today - Tagged stable builds [208430] --under development Paul: We are waiting for the webmaster for the LED's. Paul: The second item we are testing today. Then we can do the branch fairly confidently. To do the branch we need the complete list of components, those building and not. Mike: I would assume anything not being built by autobuild isn't part of the milestone? Paul: Yes. We expect to be able to do the branch on Friday. Paul: The next item, 208430, is also planned. Then the components page will just have one downloads column with a link to both nightly and stable builds Mike: We should look at how the other projects do it. Most of them have a download page. Paul: We could do that to. Mike: At some point we need to do this for deployments as well. Paul: Yes. Mary: The Eclipse standard is to have a downloads page. We do have a downloads page, which we will upgrade as soon as we have the new stable build. Paul: Are your proposing one download page? Mike: Realistically, don't want to send them to download from 30 pages. So should be able to download a whole deployment. 3) Newly Entered Bugs. Need to triage. Paul: There are a number of new bugs. As we come to the end of 1.0 we want to give more visibility to the open bugs. Paul: There are 5 bugs in section 3, Mike is you expectation that they are all 1.0 items? Mike: The first item is 1.0, second is 1.0, 3rd is fixed, need to look at last two again. Paul: The next section is bugs from Barcelona. Probably no one has had time to look at these and review the assignments. We are tracking them. I'm going to assume the default position is that these are all 1.0 items. Markus: Some of these will be hard to diagnose. Need to look at them all carefully. Brian: Is there any perceived priority for these? Tony: What deployment configuration are they related to? Paul: Don't know. Some are for all versions, some just the web. We will try to make sure. I will sort them by deployment. Tony: Sorting may help with prioritization. 4) Overall 1.0 Bug total: 82 (not including the above) Please review [2] Paul: We will track this every week. 5) Tony: Schedule for RP code contribution/merge Paul: Is there any update on that? Tony: Talked to Bruce today. This is one item that Bruce has to do. He should give us a date for that. 6) Tony: Schedule for Eclipse-based Selector code contribution Paul: Next item is RPC stuff Tony: We are in the process of bringing this up to the 1.0M9 level. Right now it is on a June level. Mike and Bruce are working on this. Paul: You are still optimistic? Tony: We are evaluating where we are. Mike: Shouldn't take much longer, only about ~30 errors left Mike: Want to make sure understand the previous version. Mike: Ok. It should be committed in the next few days. A person had health issues. 7) Selector Selector Summit Paul: This item is a new-ish topic. Actually Mike introduced this topic at the F2F last month. Paul: It isn't a 1.0 thing, but I'm starting to put some thought around this. I thought we could dedicate a section of the Provo F2F as a Selector Selector Summit. We could bring together a number of people beyond the usual Higgins F2F attendees Paul: I'd like to try to have a focused session on this. It would be about a consistent user experience and a common API to evoke a selector. We have been looking into this and there is a lot of inconsistency and adhocracy. It is something that needs attention and it seems that the Higgins project is the perfect place to do this as we are multi-platform. It is possible that even trying to prepare for this will accomplish so much we don't need to meet F2F, but we are putting a place holder in for the Provo F2F. Tony: My only concern is that this may be a little too late. Paul: We could try to do this at IIW. Tony: Yes. And maybe have a call first. 8) IIW interop/demo planning Paul: Charles could you provide and update? Charles: There is an attempt to do some sort of interop to follow-up from Barcelona. Charles: The interop would be a refinement of unsuccessful tests and completion of more advanced features Mike: Can I ask a question? I pointed people to a MS blog discussion of features. Are we able to ask Mike for specification? To get them submitted to the OSP as soon as possible? Mary: We are preparing a formal response to MS's July 9th OSP. This is one of the high priority requests. Charles: My thoughts exactly. Mike: They also asked how an S-card differs from an i-card. A response to Paul's blog. Paul: Yeah. Want to understand what Mike is suggesting. We have being thinking about having Higgins coordinate this. Charles: Mike and Pam and Charles need it. Paul: Can we meet today to discuss? Please send blog url. Mike: Will do when get on line Mary: Have started to write a preliminary draft of our response to the 2nd OSP Mike: Kim has mentioned this new blog on his blog. 9) We will have a special 30 minute agenda item for our November 8th call on "safe browsing" - discussions that have been happening in the W3C WSC TC. Mary: Tony do you want to talk about this? Tony: In the W3C WSC TC we have been looking at what it takes to have a secure browsing mode. What automatically gets set up for your browser, ... to try to eliminate some of the click through that occurs. They have some ideas... Tony: Is this something that we want to build into Higgins? Does it provide us any advantage or help us to promote best practices? Next week's session is just an intro discussion of this. Do we want to do something and if so what? Paul: This is the end of the formal agenda. Maybe at IIW we should have a Higgins session - a working session. If a number of us will be there anyway. The Selector Summit can be one topic and interoperability, etc. Mike: This is a good idea, but I may not be able to attend IIW. Maybe we could just co locate the Higgins session. Mary: The fee to attend IIW is very low, and can be waived in some circumstances. Paul: Maybe we could co-locate. Tony: Maybe this could be an interim F2F. Mike: What about just doing it on the phone? Paul: We will think about this. Paul: Did we mention that Markus has contributed the beginnings of a SAML2 IdP to Higgins? Markus: I sent a message out to the dev list. Tony: We need to figure out how this fits with the architecture. Paul: Agreed. It is not part of 1.0. Hoping to discuss how it fits into the architecture in one of these meetings. Paul: Have gotten informal offerings of resources to work on this.. Need to determine next steps on a call. Mike: So we could schedule a phone call meeting on this topic. Paul: There is too much content to jam into a weekly call. Paul: It would need to be a whole separate call Paul: We will think about it. Markus: I created the component wiki pages today. Mary: Now that we are almost done with 1.0M9, we should revisit the 1.0 schedule. Paul: I thought the suggestion out there was still to have a 12/31 end date. If it so happened that something didn't make it, at this point we would be ok. Tony: Anyone see a reason why not do that? (Keep to the 12/31 development done date?) Mary: The Eclipse foundation (and maybe others) plan to issue a press release. The end of December is not a good time for PR. Paul: We can keep to the internal due date of 12/31. Mary: Then announce after the beginning of the year. Tony: It is not necessary to develop it and announce it all together. Doesn't need to be in parallel. Can complete the release and then announce it. Mary: So the release will be done by the end of the year and we will announce it in the beginning of the year. Paul: It is politically better to have the technical work done soon. Paul: By our call next Thursday, we will have a stable 1.0M9 build.
<<attachment: winmail.dat>>