Not all changes are additive. I don’t
understand how we can make such a guarantee without seriously hampering
ourselves. We don’t know what functionality we will be trying to put into
2.0 a year from now. How can we make 1.5 tolerant of such changes? Since we can’t
make it tolerant, then this rule seriously hampers what we can do for 2.0. Here
is a recent example from the 1.0 – 1.5 transition. The .component file
needed to be renamed to be consistent with other files in the .settings
directory. Obviously the 1.0 code line knows nothing of the new name so it’s
cannot be tolerant of it. To put this change in place, it was necessary to make
projects created with 1.5 not run on 1.0.
It is extremely rare for even very mature
projects to guarantee that content created on a future release will work with
the prior release and WTP is far from being a mature project. Such guarantees
are also not necessary as users do not naturally expect this compatibility (vs
the other way around).
- Konstantin
From:
wtp-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:wtp-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Arthur Ryman
Sent: Wednesday, May 03, 2006
11:34 PM
To: General
discussion of project-wide or architectural issues.
Cc: General
discussion of project-wide or architectural issues.;
wtp-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [wtp-dev] Minutes of
the WTP Status Telecon, 2006-04-27
Kosta,
We
therefore need to ensure that either we don't introduce artifact changes that
break WTP 1.5, or that WTP 1.5 is tolerant of the changes, i.e. that it
tolerates new properties or XML content. If WTP 1.5 cannot be made tolerant to
evolution of artifacts, then WTP 2.0 needs to introduce new artifacts the WTP
1.5 does ignore, e.g. to hold extended data.
Arthur Ryman,
IBM Software Group, Rational Division
blog: http://ryman.eclipsedevelopersjournal.com/
phone: +1-905-413-3077, TL 969-3077
assistant: +1-905-413-2411, TL 969-2411
fax: +1-905-413-4920, TL 969-4920
mobile: +1-416-939-5063, text: 4169395063@xxxxxxx
"Konstantin
Komissarchik" <kosta@xxxxxxx>
Sent
by: wtp-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
05/01/2006 05:55 PM
Please
respond to
"General discussion of project-wide or
architectural issues." <wtp-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
|
|
To
|
"General
discussion of project-wide or architectural issues."
<wtp-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
|
cc
|
|
Subject
|
RE: [wtp-dev] Minutes of the WTP Status
Telecon, 2006-04-27
|
|
> A WTP 1.5 should also be able to work on projects created by WTP 2.0 users
> and shared via a repository. Any new artifacts creates by WTP 2.0 should
not
> break WTP 1.5. WTP 1.5 should either ignore or tolerate any new artifacts
> created by WTP 2.0.
I don’t think this is a good idea. By the time we are working on 2.0, 1.5
will be done. What it can and cannot ignore or tolerate will be fixed. Having
this requirement will seriously hamper our ability to deliver new functionality
not yet envisioned in the 2.0 release. I do agree that a project created on 1.5
should not be auto-upgraded when it’s opened in 2.0 unless the user
explicitly agrees to the upgrade, however I don’t think we should require
projects created in 2.0 (or those that have been upgraded) to continue working
on 1.5.
- Konstantin
From:
wtp-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:wtp-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Arthur Ryman
Sent: Monday, May 01, 2006 1:48 PM
To: General discussion of project-wide or
architectural issues.
Cc: General discussion of project-wide or
architectural issues.; wtp-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [wtp-dev] Minutes of the WTP Status Telecon, 2006-04-27
I posted some detail on compatibility requirements for WTP 2.0 on the Wiki [1].
Please review and comment.
[1]
http://wiki.eclipse.org/index.php/Web_Tools_Requirements_2.0#Compatibility_with_Other_WTP_Releases
Arthur Ryman,
IBM Software Group, Rational Division
blog: http://ryman.eclipsedevelopersjournal.com/
phone: +1-905-413-3077, TL 969-3077
assistant: +1-905-413-2411, TL 969-2411
fax: +1-905-413-4920, TL 969-4920
mobile: +1-416-939-5063, text: 4169395063@xxxxxxx
Jeffrey Liu/Toronto/IBM@IBMCA
Sent by: wtp-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
04/28/2006 10:59 AM
Please
respond to
"General discussion of project-wide or
architectural issues." <wtp-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
|
|
To
|
"General
discussion of project-wide or architectural issues."
<wtp-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
|
cc
|
|
Subject
|
[wtp-dev] Minutes of the WTP Status Telecon,
2006-04-27
|
|
See WTP Status Telecons [1] for more information.
[1] http://eclipse.org/webtools/development/status-telecons/index.html
Attendees
Amy Wu
Arthur Ryman
Chris Brealey
Chuck Bridgham
David Williams
David Klein
Jeffrey Liu
John Lanuti
Kate Price
Kathy Chan
Keith Chong
Kosta Komissarchik
Larry Dunnell
Lawrence Mandel
Nitin Dahyabhai
Rob Frost
Ted Bashor
Thomas Yip
Tim Deboer
Tim Wagner
1. Actions Items - Jeffrey Liu
Active Items
The following actions items showed some activity last week. [1]
ID
|
Sev
|
Pri
|
Plt
|
Assignee
|
Status
|
Resolution
|
Summary
|
128308
|
nor
|
P3
|
PC
|
jeffliu@xxxxxxxxxx
|
RESO
|
FIXE
|
[action] Document and Communicate Hot Bug Process
|
136715
|
nor
|
P3
|
PC
|
amywu@xxxxxxxxxx
|
RESO
|
FIXE
|
[action] SSE: Review and identify changes in WTP 1.5
that...
|
136716
|
nor
|
P3
|
PC
|
csalter@xxxxxxxxxx
|
NEW
|
|
[action] XML: Review and identify changes in WTP 1.5
that...
|
136717
|
nor
|
P3
|
PC
|
cbrealey@xxxxxxxxxx
|
CLOS
|
FIXE
|
[action] WS: Review and identify changes in WTP 1.5
that ...
|
136719
|
nor
|
P3
|
PC
|
cbridgha@xxxxxxxxxx
|
NEW
|
|
[action] J2EE: Review and identify changes in WTP
1.5 tha...
|
136720
|
nor
|
P3
|
PC
|
dpchou@xxxxxxxxxx
|
NEW
|
|
[action] RDB: Review and identify changes in WTP 1.5
that...
|
6 bugs found.
Open Items
The following action items are currently
open [2]. Action items owners should update their status
in Bugzilla prior to the status telecon. Thx.
ID
|
Sev
|
Pri
|
Plt
|
Assignee
|
Status
|
Resolution
|
Summary
|
136716
|
nor
|
P3
|
PC
|
csalter@xxxxxxxxxx
|
NEW
|
|
[action] XML: Review and identify changes in WTP 1.5
that...
|
136719
|
nor
|
P3
|
PC
|
cbridgha@xxxxxxxxxx
|
NEW
|
|
[action] J2EE: Review and identify changes in WTP
1.5 tha...
|
136720
|
nor
|
P3
|
PC
|
dpchou@xxxxxxxxxx
|
NEW
|
|
[action] RDB: Review and identify changes in WTP 1.5
that...
|
3 bugs found.
[1] https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/buglist.cgi?short_desc_type=casesubstring&short_desc=%5Baction%5D&product=Web+Tools&chfieldfrom=7d&chfieldto=Now
[2] https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/buglist.cgi?short_desc_type=casesubstring&short_desc=%5Baction%5D&product=Web+Tools&bug_status=NEW&bug_status=ASSIGNED&bug_status=REOPENED
Jeff -
Updates in bugzilla.
2. WTP 1.0.2 Status
- David Williams
https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=138825
Update Manager site broken: underscores are in some feature version qualifiers
David -
Was scheduled to announce yesterday, but found a bug. So we held off the
announcement. Want to discuss it before declaring.
David -
At the PMC call tuesday, we agreed to have a 1.0.3 maintenance stream. My
recommandation is to fix this bug in 1.0.3. Do a build before andy other fixes
gets in so that the community can use that build.
Tim -
What's the impact of this bug?
David -
It affects update manager. Also, if users want to debug WTP, the they need to get
the code from CVS directly. Platfrom see this as a permanent limitation, so we
just have to live with it.
David -
If no objections, I'll declare 1.0.2 in the afternoon? Congratulation everyone
on this achievement.
David -
Please hold off releasing anything to the maintenance stream (1.0.3) until this
bug is fixed and the update manager site is ready.
David -
Also, I suggest all 1.0.3 fixes require some level of PMC approval.
Arthur -
Agree.
Tim -
Each build should be treated as a release candidate, so no regression.
Ted -
What's the process for approval? Send request to the wtp-dev list?
David -
Yup, send request to wtp-dev list and PMC members will vote in the bugzilla.
Jeff -
Any dates for 1.0.3?
David -
TBD.
Arthur -
I think we need to see how adopters are coming along with 1.0.2. If adopters
ship 1.0.2 to customers, it will generate bugs. We need to see what's the
incoming rate and then determine the dates.
3. WTP 1.5 Status
3.1 WTP 1.5 Build Status
- David Williams
David -
RC2 is building fine. RC2 will be next Friday according to the Callisto
schedule. Our prereqs will probably release sometime Wed. We'll spend Thurs
smoke test and declare on Fri.
David -
There are some failing JUnit testcases that Chuck and I were talking about.
Chuck cannot reproduce them under Windows. Jeff, can we get test results for
these test under another Linux machine?
David -
After RC2, fixes will need component lead approval. Also, I believe it's after
RC4 that all projects will announce the bugs that will be fixed.
Ted - We
need to get an architecture review of the thread safety issue?
Chuck -
I'm out next week, we can do it the following Monday.
David -
For next week, component lead should have triage all the bugs so that we can
get an accurate count of the number of P1, P2 and etc.
3.2 WTP 1.5 Hot Bugs [1]
- Jeffrey Liu
[1] http://www.eclipse.org/webtools/plans/1.5/adopter-hotlist-report.html
Ted
- Are we using the new hot bug process.
Jeff
- Yes, my fault, forgot to include the queries in the minutes.
4. Other Business - Open
Arthur -
I ran into problems when opening old projects with 1.5. The projects don't show
up.
Chuck -
If you open it with the old navigator, you won't see anything.
Arthur -
Not just for Web projects, same goes for any projects.
David -
Sounds like a platform bug.
Chuck -
I've tried it before and it worked.
Arthur -
What's the story for 1.0.2 and 1.5 co-existence?
Chuck -
We support it.
Jeff -
What about scenario like this one: create project with 1.0.2, check into CVS.
Check out project using 1.5, modify something (ex. generate a Web service).
Check project into CVS. Open project again with 1.0.2, will this work?
David -
Sounds like a good testcase to try.
Arthur -
We need to spell out the scenarios that we support when we do the requirements
for 2.0.
David -
Goal is to be consistent with the Platform.
David -
Another testcase: set preference in 1.0.2. Open the same workspace with 1.5 and
make sure all the preferences are still valid. Preference sometimes change
names, in which case, migration is needed.
Kathy -
Are we not going to declare an I build this week? Meaning we do not need to
hold back on releasing?
David -
Plan is to not declare one. But keep in mind that we are in shut down mode, so
every build should have some level of stability.
Kathy -
We have quite a few fixes this week, would be nice to have an I build declared.
David -
Anyone else want one this week?
Chuck - I
would vote for one.
David -
OK.
Tim - We
have some problems generating the usage report using the API scanner.
Jeff -
I'll take a look and reply to your note.
Thanks,
Jeffrey
Liu
IBM Rational Software
IBM Toronto Lab.
8200 Warden Ave. Markham, Ontario, L6G 1C7
Internal mail: D3/UMZ/8200/MKM (D3-268)
T/L: 969 3531
Tel: (905) 413 3531
Fax: (905) 413 4920
jeffliu@xxxxxxxxxx_______________________________________________
wtp-dev mailing list
wtp-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/wtp-dev
_______________________________________________________________________
Notice: This email message, together with
any attachments, may contain
information of BEA Systems,
Inc., its subsidiaries and affiliated
entities, that may be confidential,
proprietary, copyrighted and/or
legally privileged, and is intended solely for the
use of the individual
or entity named in this message. If you are not
the intended recipient,
and have received this message in error, please
immediately return this
by email and then delete it.
_______________________________________________
wtp-dev mailing list
wtp-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/wtp-dev