You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to muse-dev@ws.apache.org by Daniel Jemiolo <da...@us.ibm.com> on 2006/09/14 18:07:12 UTC
Apache Muse status report
Hello PMC Members,
The Muse team is hard at work making web site and documentation updates
for the current build, with a release planned for Friday, the 22nd[1]. I
wanted to take this opportunity to pause and send an update to the entire
PMC team and see if anyone had any questions about the state of the
project. I put a quick update in the September Board Report, but I know
everyone is busy and wanted to make sure this info was out there.
Since our first milestone at the end of June, we have had a second
milestone (August), frozen the code (September), and have refactored the
web site and documentation to account for new versions. We have been
fortunate to receive a lot of bug reports, ideas for improvement, and
(best of all) patches for both.
The IBM programmers that donated the current code base have continued to
work on bugs related to the core engine and code generation tools.
Programmers from Compuware have contributed a large set of code for
OSGi-based deployment and some refactoring of the core engine. Our Cisco
contributors helped us recreate our build with Maven so that we had less
scripts and less steps; they have submitted a number of bug reports/fixes
as well, but the help in setting up a build/test framework was most
important (and unexpected). Finally, the Eclipse TPTP and Corona
programmers have integrated Muse into their projects, giving it even more
exercise before our freeze and release.
When you add all of these contributions together, we have a stable
codebase that offers an implementation of the recently-ratified WSRF 1.2,
WSDM 1.1, and WSN 1.3 specs for Axis2 and OSGi. Our plan for the rest of
the year is to focus on bug reports and the mailing list for our release.
The team is happy with our status so far, and I'd like to open the floor
to the PMC to see if anyone has any questions or discussion before we
branch the code and vote next week. This is the first release for all of
our committers, so we'd like to make sure we haven't overlooked anything.
Thanks,
Dan
[1] http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=muse-dev&m=115462096322607&w=2
Dan Jemiolo
IBM Corporation
Research Triangle Park, NC
+++ I'm an engineer. I make slides that people can't read. Sometimes I eat
donuts. +++
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: muse-dev-unsubscribe@ws.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: muse-dev-help@ws.apache.org
Re: Apache Muse status report
Posted by Daniel Jemiolo <da...@us.ibm.com>.
Hi Steve,
Here are some answers for you:
> Overall, I'm impressed with the progress and glad that a
> near-dead project has been revitalized. I'd also like to
> find out more about your OSGi-based deployment design.
Joel Hawkins from our team could speak in more detail about the OSGi
deployment code itself, but in general, we have a programming model that
is consistent across J2EE/OSGi, so users don't have to recompile code or
change their deployment descriptor when moving from one platform to
another. Each platform we support (Axis2, OSGi, etc) has a
platform-specific module that handles the required deployment/semantics
and allows the user to ignore the underlying platform (for the most part
;) ).
> As I am currently trying to get some WSRF interop between
> Muse 1.x and another stack working, I have some questions:
>
> 1. How have you tested WSRF/WSN interoperability?
> 2. are there any normative tests for WSRF/WSN? If not,
> when you have an interop problem, how do you decide
> who gets the blame?
1. Interop testing happens in a number of ways. First, schema validation
of incoming/outgoing messages. But more importantly (since a number of the
WS-* specs are rather liberal in their schemas), we have tested with other
WS-* client/browser tools (IBM has made at least three that I know of);
testing with other stacks happens as we discover the stacks.
2. There are no normative tests - the TCs do not publish any kind of tests
like Sun does for Java specifications. So, I will go with the traditional
programmer answer: "it depends". Since it's an open community, I think the
only reasonable answer is that we would work with whoever was responsible
for the other stack and try to determine which part(s) of our
implemenation(s) was incorrect.
Dan
Steve Loughran <st...@apache.org> wrote on 09/20/2006 08:46:26 AM:
> Daniel Jemiolo wrote:
> > Hello PMC Members,
> >
> > The Muse team is hard at work making web site and documentation
updates
> > for the current build, with a release planned for Friday, the 22nd[1].
I
> > wanted to take this opportunity to pause and send an update to the
entire
> > PMC team and see if anyone had any questions about the state of the
> > project. I put a quick update in the September Board Report, but I
know
> > everyone is busy and wanted to make sure this info was out there.
> >
> > Since our first milestone at the end of June, we have had a second
> > milestone (August), frozen the code (September), and have refactored
the
> > web site and documentation to account for new versions. We have been
> > fortunate to receive a lot of bug reports, ideas for improvement, and
> > (best of all) patches for both.
> >
> > The IBM programmers that donated the current code base have continued
to
> > work on bugs related to the core engine and code generation tools.
> > Programmers from Compuware have contributed a large set of code for
> > OSGi-based deployment and some refactoring of the core engine. Our
Cisco
> > contributors helped us recreate our build with Maven so that we had
less
> > scripts and less steps; they have submitted a number of bug
reports/fixes
> > as well, but the help in setting up a build/test framework was most
> > important (and unexpected). Finally, the Eclipse TPTP and Corona
> > programmers have integrated Muse into their projects, giving it even
more
> > exercise before our freeze and release.
> >
> > When you add all of these contributions together, we have a stable
> > codebase that offers an implementation of the recently-ratified WSRF
1.2,
> > WSDM 1.1, and WSN 1.3 specs for Axis2 and OSGi. Our plan for the rest
of
> > the year is to focus on bug reports and the mailing list for our
release.
>
> Overall, I'm impressed with the progress and glad that a near-dead
> project has been revitalized. I'd also like to find out more about your
> OSGi-based deployment design.
>
> As I am currently trying to get some WSRF interop between Muse 1.x and
> another stack working, I have some questions:
>
> 1. How have you tested WSRF/WSN interoperability?
> 2. are there any normative tests for WSRF/WSN? If not, when you have an
> interop problem, how do you decide who gets the blame?
>
> -Steve
>
>
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: muse-dev-unsubscribe@ws.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: muse-dev-help@ws.apache.org
Re: Apache Muse status report
Posted by Steve Loughran <st...@apache.org>.
Daniel Jemiolo wrote:
> Hello PMC Members,
>
> The Muse team is hard at work making web site and documentation updates
> for the current build, with a release planned for Friday, the 22nd[1]. I
> wanted to take this opportunity to pause and send an update to the entire
> PMC team and see if anyone had any questions about the state of the
> project. I put a quick update in the September Board Report, but I know
> everyone is busy and wanted to make sure this info was out there.
>
> Since our first milestone at the end of June, we have had a second
> milestone (August), frozen the code (September), and have refactored the
> web site and documentation to account for new versions. We have been
> fortunate to receive a lot of bug reports, ideas for improvement, and
> (best of all) patches for both.
>
> The IBM programmers that donated the current code base have continued to
> work on bugs related to the core engine and code generation tools.
> Programmers from Compuware have contributed a large set of code for
> OSGi-based deployment and some refactoring of the core engine. Our Cisco
> contributors helped us recreate our build with Maven so that we had less
> scripts and less steps; they have submitted a number of bug reports/fixes
> as well, but the help in setting up a build/test framework was most
> important (and unexpected). Finally, the Eclipse TPTP and Corona
> programmers have integrated Muse into their projects, giving it even more
> exercise before our freeze and release.
>
> When you add all of these contributions together, we have a stable
> codebase that offers an implementation of the recently-ratified WSRF 1.2,
> WSDM 1.1, and WSN 1.3 specs for Axis2 and OSGi. Our plan for the rest of
> the year is to focus on bug reports and the mailing list for our release.
Overall, I'm impressed with the progress and glad that a near-dead
project has been revitalized. I'd also like to find out more about your
OSGi-based deployment design.
As I am currently trying to get some WSRF interop between Muse 1.x and
another stack working, I have some questions:
1. How have you tested WSRF/WSN interoperability?
2. are there any normative tests for WSRF/WSN? If not, when you have an
interop problem, how do you decide who gets the blame?
-Steve
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: muse-dev-unsubscribe@ws.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: muse-dev-help@ws.apache.org