JEE Status Meetings/2010-02-04
- Carl Anderson
- Jason Peterson
- Kaloyan Raev
- Rob Stryker
- Chuck Bridgham
- Angel Vera
Java EE 6
- EJB 3.1 bugs of note: 241667 241668 299086
- Glassfish Java EE 6 wizards
- Java EE Tools plan
- EJB Tools plan
- List of Java EE 6 bugs that need to be rolled into the WTP 3.2 plan
- Migrate JEE export operations to use the FlatVirtualComponent Model 299576
- Migrate Java EE Deployables to use the new VCF traversal logic 297653 - Committed to WTP 3.2 M5
- Allow simple but extensible Virtual Component Framework traversal 296764 - Committed to WTP 3.2 M5
Java (not EE)
- Creation/implementation of features/plugins that allow for Java project manipulation/export/deploy
- Move Java participants out of jst.j2ee bug 300425
- Move SingleRootUtil out of jst.j2ee bug 300429
Server Tools Enhancements:
|293742||Discussion continue. Not in plan, yet|
|286699||Need to review. Not in plan, yet|
Carl: First up is Java EE 6. Kaloyan- do you have anything to say about the three EJB 3.1 bugs of note?
Kaloyan: I am finishing accessibility now. I hope to start these next week.
Carl: Have we heard anything from the Glassfish folk?
Kaloyan: Unfortunately, no.
Carl: We are working on the web fragment facet and install delegate and hope to have them in soon. Rob- what about Virtual Components?
Rob: We are now running into issues that I had thought about but had not run into yet. Jason P- what are the issues you are running into?
Jason P: Running a file within a module on server - it finds the EAR, processes the binary modules before it processes the project. So the changes in the project aren't readily exposed.
Angel: Quick question - when you import the project, it has a binary version?
Rob: And the binary modules stay in the EAR, even though there is a project now?
Angel: Has it always been that way?
Rob: That explains why the tests were structured that way.
Chuck: The project should take precedence.
Rob: How do you know which one to give credit to? That at least says that we need some validation. The user should be made aware if there are conflicting entries. But it also points to some work for me- the project should take precedence.
Jason P: Carl mentioned that there were a few JUnit failures
Chuck: Export wasn't part of M5. This is new to M6.
Rob: I also dropped some more changes last night- I am not sure at what point Carl ran his tests.
Chuck: Do we know what we would need to backport to M5 to get our adopter product working on M5?
Discussion about what might be done for an adopter which is testing with M5.
Rob: I've been working on moving the non-Java EE participants out to just jst code. I would like to add an interface where any VirtualComponent can say "I have a classpath, and here it is"
Chuck: That sounds like a good idea
Jason P: I know a bit of the SingleRoot stuff is Java EE-specific. How soon do they need this moved? How important is it?
Chuck: This isn't a P1
Jason P: I made a parent operation that is generic. However, in the save adapter, for connector, I had to get Java EE-specific to use IArchive, instead of the FlatComponentModel
Chuck: If we can make the case that a generic component can go through the code path- that is more important than where this code lives right now.
Jason P; As long as we put the generic export class out in non- Java EE, they should be happy for now.
Rob: That's all I really have.
Chuck: I do plan on dropping in more changes to finish up the property page. Hopefully by next week we will see some progress there.
Rob: Jason P- one other thing to test- using the variable references for export
Jason P: Connectors won't work with FlatVirtualComponent. I know which bug you are talking about. I will test that.
Rob: Other than moving things down to common areas and other minor tinkering, this is just about finished.
Carl: That leaves the Other topics. Angel, anything to discuss?
Angel: I need to get back to 293742
Rob: I can redo the patch, just tell me what is agreeable.
Jason P: Our first priority - we need the fix for the duplicate issue as soon as possible.
Rob: Carl - congratulations on your nomination to Component Lead for Common.
(General congrats & thank yous)