Skip to main content
Jump to: navigation, search

Difference between revisions of "WTP Architecture Working Group"

m (Minutes 9/14)
m (Next meeting)
Line 54: Line 54:
::Call-in Info: 1 866-245-5059 Passcode: 4203514
::Call-in Info: 1 866-245-5059 Passcode: 4203514
(will meet on following Mondays for several weeks)
(will meet on following Mondays for several weeks)
Start of a new wiki page:

Revision as of 09:49, 24 September 2007

WTP Architecture Working Group


  • Make current with how things currently are (add, JSF, JPA, DTP, etc.)
  • Make current with how we want things to be (improved componentization, etc)
  • Make a Projects View
  • Make a Features View
  • Make recommendations that are important to release 3.0, such as
  • Can we install and/or enable proper capabilities for various install scenarios?
  • Should/can some plugins move to better components/features?
  • Work with project leads for the "bottoms up" perspective, and address what's realistic

Minutes 9/14

Attendees: Konstantin, Nitin, Cameron, David W, Tim dB

Some of the discussion topics:

  • Long term, should/can we use the build to enforce architecture?
  • We can build things separately, but build currently assumes things go in a single order, i.e. once things are built they are available to all future components that build.
  • Should the foundation supply build infrastructure?
  • They already provide machines and much infrastructure.
  • Build project has been suggested before, and other teams have tried to promote their build technology. There has been little interest.
  • Maybe just common scripts or mechanisms for sharing?
  • WTP structure is now several projects, each with core vs UI and wst vs jst split.
  • Suggestion of packaging individual features or components for download. Could be on a separate download page, but would allow adopters to get exactly what they want.
  • Is that overkill?
  • Unclear how 3.4 provisioning work might affect features.
  • We should break components up as wst/jst when we look at dependencies.
  • Will want to eventually investigate core/UI split too.
  • Should tests be included as part of a component?
  • In practice we should have component level tests (part of a component) and project/cross-component tests. In reality most tests are component level, but some components have cross-component tests too.
  • General agreement we should look at our dependencies without tests (to investigate the clean/runtime view of things) and also compare to see what dependencies tests add.
  • Discussed Konstantin's visualization tool, Tim's dependency tool
  • Cyclic dependencies are bad. :)
  • What about other dependencies, esp. JDT?
  • Should come up with a view of what requires JDT and what doesn't.
  • JEM and EMF both have non-JDT/JDT split as well.


  • Konstantin: Check on legal issues and send out source to tool
  • Tim: Start modifying tool to read K's component format, start editing existing wiki page, setup next meeting

Next meeting

Date: Monday, September 24th
Time: 1pm EDT/10am PDT
Call-in Info: 1 866-245-5059 Passcode: 4203514

(will meet on following Mondays for several weeks)

Start of a new wiki page:

Back to the top