2.0 M3

[ant elder <an...@gmail.com>]

Now that 2.0-M2 is almost done I'm looking at what to do for M3 which
from the previously discussed schedule would be around the end of May.
Some things I'm interested for M3 right now are:

Finishing off some of the webapp support from M2 - finishing the JSONP
binding and the Wicket integration module, and giving the webapp
runtime support to use contributions outside of the webapp classpath.

There's some work to do on the archetypes still, and it would be good
to add some more, maybe some for tuscany developers to add extensions
- implementation, binding, etc archetypes.

There's the continuing work supporting the OASIS spec's properly -
i've started getting the SCA client API from the latest Assembly spec
working and there's more to do there and that starts touching on
another thing we should start looking at which is distributed domain
support. Hopefully the endpoint changes that went into M2 will help
and I'd like to start looking at that and what we can do to support
proper dynamic operation with nodes coming and going, don't expect
that would get finished for M3 but some start at least would be good.

Not directly related to 2.x i think we should look at trying to use
Hudson for the nightly builds.

   ...ant

Re: 2.0 M3

[Simon Laws <si...@googlemail.com>]

On Thu, Apr 9, 2009 at 4:34 PM, ant elder <an...@apache.org> wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 9, 2009 at 4:30 PM, Simon Laws <si...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>
>> I want to copy over some 1.x changes as a prelude to bringing up
>> binding.jms. We may even be able to make a start on getting that in
>>
>
> Ok good and i can help with that, did start looking at it before M2
> but left it as it needs all the core changes for wireformat support,
> would be good to start getting JMS going in 2.x and updating for the
> latest oasis spec
>
>   ...ant
>

Yep, agreed. That was what I was alluding with the "some 1.x changes"
as all the 1.x Tuscany wire format stuff needs updated to make it
match what's in the OASIS specifications.

Simon

Re: 2.0 M3

[ant elder <an...@apache.org>]

On Thu, Apr 9, 2009 at 4:30 PM, Simon Laws <si...@googlemail.com> wrote:

> I want to copy over some 1.x changes as a prelude to bringing up
> binding.jms. We may even be able to make a start on getting that in
>

Ok good and i can help with that, did start looking at it before M2
but left it as it needs all the core changes for wireformat support,
would be good to start getting JMS going in 2.x and updating for the
latest oasis spec

   ...ant

Re: 2.0 M3

[Simon Laws <si...@googlemail.com>]

snip...

> another thing we should start looking at which is distributed domain
> support. Hopefully the endpoint changes that went into M2 will help
> and I'd like to start looking at that and what we can do to support
> proper dynamic operation with nodes coming and going, don't expect
> that would get finished for M3 but some start at least would be good.

+1 I think we should bring the domain back in now and am happy to help
if needed.

>
> Not directly related to 2.x i think we should look at trying to use
> Hudson for the nightly builds.

it would be worth tying to see if it's more friendly than confluence.

>
>   ...ant
>

I need to do a bit more work to get rid of the old EndpointReference structure.

I want to copy over some 1.x changes as a prelude to bringing up
binding.jms. We may even be able to make a start on getting that in

I'd like to get stuck into making the OASIS tests run and fixing and
conformance changes they identify. We don't have to wait for tests of
course if we know where changes are required for OASIS.

Also need to add the fix to allow the write operation to determine
what version of the SCA is in place to the correct processors can be
chosen.

We need to decide if the builders are going to be backward compatible.
This probably comes under the domain heading as, IIRC, our baseline
solution is to treat a node as supporting SCA 1.1 or 1.0. It's the
domain that would have to deal with both flavours.

Simon

Re: 2.0 M3

[Luciano Resende <lu...@gmail.com>]

On Thu, Apr 9, 2009 at 11:09 AM, Raymond Feng <en...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Here are a few things coming to my mind:
>
> 1. Start to implement/fix the OASIS new features or differences against
> OSOA. Some of the items are listed at [1].
> 2. Start to create message files to contain the text from the OASIS
> conformance tests and reference them from the validation points in the code
> 3. Continue to implement the policy spec
> 4. Continue to implement OSGi RFC 119
> 5. Start to define our new Domain/Node story
> 6. Bring up the binding/implementation extensions that defined by OASIS
>

+1, I believe these items should be the highest priority (particularly
1, 2 and 3), and just them we should concentrate in other items and
extensions, etc.


-- 
Luciano Resende
http://people.apache.org/~lresende
http://lresende.blogspot.com/

Re: 2.0 M3

[Raymond Feng <en...@gmail.com>]

Here are a few things coming to my mind:

1. Start to implement/fix the OASIS new features or differences against 
OSOA. Some of the items are listed at [1].
2. Start to create message files to contain the text from the OASIS 
conformance tests and reference them from the validation points in the code
3. Continue to implement the policy spec
4. Continue to implement OSGi RFC 119
5. Start to define our new Domain/Node story
6. Bring up the binding/implementation extensions that defined by OASIS

[1] 
http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/TUSCANYWIKI/OSOA+SCA+vs+OASIS+SCA

Thanks,
Raymond
--------------------------------------------------
From: "ant elder" <an...@gmail.com>
Sent: Thursday, April 09, 2009 3:39 AM
To: <de...@tuscany.apache.org>
Subject: 2.0 M3

> Now that 2.0-M2 is almost done I'm looking at what to do for M3 which
> from the previously discussed schedule would be around the end of May.
> Some things I'm interested for M3 right now are:
>
> Finishing off some of the webapp support from M2 - finishing the JSONP
> binding and the Wicket integration module, and giving the webapp
> runtime support to use contributions outside of the webapp classpath.
>
> There's some work to do on the archetypes still, and it would be good
> to add some more, maybe some for tuscany developers to add extensions
> - implementation, binding, etc archetypes.
>
> There's the continuing work supporting the OASIS spec's properly -
> i've started getting the SCA client API from the latest Assembly spec
> working and there's more to do there and that starts touching on
> another thing we should start looking at which is distributed domain
> support. Hopefully the endpoint changes that went into M2 will help
> and I'd like to start looking at that and what we can do to support
> proper dynamic operation with nodes coming and going, don't expect
> that would get finished for M3 but some start at least would be good.
>
> Not directly related to 2.x i think we should look at trying to use
> Hudson for the nightly builds.
>
>   ...ant