Skip to main content
Jump to: navigation, search

TPTP-PMC-20090204

Logistics

Attending: Chris, Harm, Oliver, Paul, Joanna, Kathy, Ernest, Joel

Any objections to last weeks summary?

  • No

Any movement of items to front of agenda?

  • No

TPTP Release Discussion

Oliver asks if we are on track.

  • Paul notes that we are on track for our current test work. Test reports seem to be filling in well.
    • In looking at report Platform.doc and Platform.agent test results need a bit more work

Notice: We are in PMC approval mode for MUST-FIX defects ONLY right now and will move into another test pass shortly.

  • Paul would like to mention that if you do have a priority fix that you get approval for to make sure to check it into both head and into the 4.5.2 codebase.

Joel would like to know which driver we should drop for uplevel project. The one we tested or a more recent build

  • Paul notes that there are a number of priority defects (for test) in the early driver that were detected during test cycle and have since been fixed.
    • Ideally, Paul would like to see a later build dropped
    • We looked at the schedule. On our schedule, the deadline is today but it is actually a bit later this week because Joanna typically calendars in a few days of flex for us
    • Team made a general agreement to drop the one from the 20th (earlier build)
  • It is just one more week to RC2 (so there will be a new drop opportunity for later build soon.).

Harm noted from looking at the website that the I3 testpass reports look wrong (100% identical to previous iteration)

  • Paul notes that there is a mistake on the website (wrong link on the page) and he will fix
  • Paul notes that the correct value for completion at this time is 79%

Java 1.4 support

Paul notes that when we updated to most recent BIRT, etc some dependences on Java5 came up.

  • TPTP still supports Java 1.4
  • We need to discuss the extent to which external components we depend on depend on Java 5 and have discussion about whether to lock into an earlier release of these components, push for the component groups to continue 1.4 support, or drop 1.4 support ourselves.

There was a mix of technical discussion about which components do and do not require Java 1.5 now. It is one of or some combination of BIRT, EMF, or one other piece.

  • The M5 candidate component for BIRT was one example.
  • Paul notes that team had to start building one plugin with Java 1.5 (setting prereq file to require java 1.5) in the UI of the test project
  • Also new EMF requires 1.5 too. We have not been using it because we still support 1.4. We could get some optimizations if we drop 1.4 and move to the new EMF.
  • Harm notes that we used to compile with Java5 javac with parameters to create Java class files for execution on 1.4.
    • Question whether any features of Java5 are needed at runtime.
    • Paul mentioned a pointer to some documentation (I think regarding EMF) that discussed generics (a Java5 addition)

Paul opened opened 263122 for us to have a discussion about dropping 1.4 support in 4.5.3)...

  • Query: Will IBM require Java 1.4 support.
    • Harm does not think that this requirement has changed.
    • Kathy notes that IBM is trying to solidify response to what needs 1.4
    • Definitely other Eclipse projects are starting to drop support
    • Whatever we do, we will still need to maintain the models for importing/using data collected with previous (TPTP 4.x) agents.

Harm raised comment that if another project have moved to Java5 it would constitute a changed API and would officially require a major release.

  • If there is a major release, Eclipse policies would not require us to update to use it.
  • If a project just silently dropped support, they are breaking a contract.
  • Chris raised the question of whether we would need to call TPTP 4.5.3 TPTP 5.0 if WE decide that we want to drop Java 1.4 support.

The discussion got a bit confused toward the end. Joel mentioned that several of the offending comonents have been fixed.

  • All of our plugins currently have "requires" flag set to Java1.4
  • Joel said that EMF is the only Java5 dependence now (some of the other components have fixed it). He found a link talking about generics support (a Java5 feature).
  • Harm notes that bundling for 1.4 and 1.5 happens when we create an all-in-one build.

We hope that more information about what other projects have fixed any dependencies that we have by next week so we can have a "final" discussion.

4.5.2 Defect deferral

Paul has list of 4.5.2 defects that he would like to defer to 4.5.3.

  • Consuming products are okay with this list
  • What should be our voting/announce strategy on these deferrals.
    • By end of this week would like to have the list ready to put out on the list in case there is any community input.

Joanna wants to have discussion with Yunan on the platform side about what defects can be contained

  • Chris mentioned that Yunan is going to be working a fair amount on eclipsecon for the next month and will have only limited time available
  • We will plan to have a 3-way thread to discuss.

Post 4.5.3.

Oliver is putting together a report on what we've accomplished in the last year to provide details to participants and community and to help stir interest in discussing the next steps

  • We would like do a postmortem of 4.5.2 (what went well and what could have been better)
  • 4.5.3 (June is going to have similar goals ... working on bug backlog)
  • Last year report discussed test load issues and the simplicity of internal versus external development

EclipseCon

  • Eugene contacting presenters to make sure presenters are on track.
  • Oliver thanked Eugene for all the hard work.

Misc

Oliver talked a bit about providing collateral regarding an award for one the participants

  • Joanna and Harm had discussed and agreed on the position.
  • Eugene and Oliver will iterate a bit on recommendation format itself

Back to the top