[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[tptp-monitoring-tools-dev] Meeting minutes

The Monitoring meeting minutes for the following dates have been posted, and are attached for folks who requested that minutes be emailed in addition to being posted on the web site:
June 14
June 21
June 28
July 5

Ruth Lee
IBM Toronto Lab
T/L 969-4453
Monitoring project
George, Jim, Hendra, Paul, Ruth

- No 3.3 defects
- no 4.0 defects
Title: Attendees














-         no Monitoring 3.3 defects


Monitoring 4.0 defects

100381 ? Dan ? small fix. Second drop for 4.0 docs in July. Dan to put a comment in the defect. Dan to review the other DVT and report back to Ruth so that she can report on the status in tonight?s meeting.

100979 ? Dave ? opened yesterday during the test pass. Array out of bounds ? corner case or will it happen every time? It?s a particular log record, an attribute in that log record. Is this a regression? It?s a quick fix, but also a question of rebuilding or not. Keep adding more log files to the test bucket, but not reported before?

4.0 status ? recall of candidate yesterday due to EMF. EMF changed and path location changed. Changed from a directory to a JAR.


-         broke this week due to EMF changing plugins from directories into JARs. Ruth to raise getting pre-notification.


What is the last Platform driver? Because we?ll have to regression test. Ruth to find out.


Ruth to generate the Tabular test report, Hubert to talk with Jerome/Joe/Sheldon re: test reports.



Title: Minutes for the Monitoring Meeting June 28, 2005








101367 ? Eclipse bug? Can be README. Defer

101545 ? static parser bug that was fixed last week. not parsing the records correctly. Can be README. Defer.

101704 ? Dave to change the value of the field.

101718 ? README. Defer

101889 ? Dave to put the comment in the script and also open a README. Defer.


90665 ? will be fixed today

93458 ? Hubert to talk to Samson today. Need to remove some .properties files from CVS, some from Samson?s and some from Test. Then Hubert to send an email to Kit and Sonia. Ruth to raise this one at the PMC.



101954 ? not a UI bug. Works on Windows but not AIX. Could be deferred past 3.3. Something wrong on the agent side, Hendra to decide if we need to fix this.


101491 ? affects 3.3 as well. Problem some remote import cases where the client. Unless this affects a mainline case, keep the fix in 4.0 only. Error found when user does something wrong. Only shows up in log import because log import uses multiple agents. Dave to open a README item for that one in 3.3.







Monitoring project
Dave, Valentina, Dan Eugene, George, Hubert
No 3.3 defects
test driver available and testing underway
Ruth we need to know if the 3.3 TVT defects are now to be deferred

98311 - javadoc to complete today
96020 - deferred to 4.1
96040 - deferred to 4.1

defect needed for changing the packaging to remove Hyades perfmon agent from the Z/OS package. These are not properly tested on Z in 3.3 or 4.0. George to open the defect, Hubert to do the work.
Ruth to confirm when we have our last 3.3 drop to determine if Hubert needs to patch a driver vs do a build.
4.0 will be caught in a new build at the end of this week.	

Actual move of log view to monitor project was discussed and there are currently code dependancies between this view and the statistical viewer. Therefore this migration will have to take place during 4.1 and design work will need to take place. It appears some more splitting of the stats viewer is needed as well, so that the view is isolated from the model instance and agent that actually create and hold the data. This is also work to be done in 4.1 and George will open the defects.

trace project
Dave, Valentina, Dan Eugene, Hubert
no defects, testing is under way
The move of trace views to the trace project is very viable code wise. However feature.xml can be impacted and would need to be refactored in 4.0 for future compatibility. It turns out we have no abstract features that contain other features so on the surface there is no hot 4.0 issue. However Hubert and Valentina will talk to Peter Manahan and other downstream products to determine if they need logical feature grouping in our deliverables. The preferred answer is no.