Skip to main content
Jump to: navigation, search

2006-10-26 wtp-requiremements-minutes

Requirements meeting minutes - October, 26 2006

Attending: Jochen Krause (wtp - innoopract), Gino Bustelo (atf - ibm), Nitin Dahyabhai (wtp - ibm), Amy Wu (wtp - ibm), Tim Wagner (wtp - bea), Bob Fraser (bea), David Williams (wtp - ibm), Neil Hauge (jpa/dali - oracle), Todd Williams (genuitec), John Graham(dtp - sybase), Rob Frost(bea), Shaun Smith (jpa/dali - oracle), Jonas Leine (sap), Kaloyan Raev (sap), Tzanko Stefanov (sap)


  • walk through webtools 2.0 plan items
  • overview bugzilla enhancement requests
  • open session for requirements

Webtools 2.0 plan

David williams walking through the plan [1]

  • plan will remain active
  • we will mostly move to J2SE5 as execution environment
  • by 2.0 the now incubating project will be graduated (JSF, JPA, ATF? Is not yet clear)
  • JSF, JPA provide inroads to JEE5


  • QUALITY is a major theme for 2.0 - not a lot of new features, but resolving major bugs
  • Adopter readiness
    • JEE5 - SAP supplied a patch that just works
    • better componentization (make reuse of components easier)
    • improve API, extend official API
  • USE the build infrastructure for Europa, called Orbit
  • USE DITA for help content
  • Move to DTP (from rdb)
  • Make it pluggable - that others can provide implementations, but WTP does not have the capacity to provide all implementation ourselves

Kaloyan Raev:

  • have submitted a patch - want to continue working on that and be involved in the discussion
  • want to work on the models and would like to be involved in the discussions
  • will supply a document that covers their vision of how to become involved

Tzanko Stefanov:

  • also have implementations in the area of web services, that they are inclined to contribute to webtools
    • contributions for the 1.5 code stream
    • David Williams: We have a general theme that we only extend the 2.0 stream (not maintenance stream) - but will try to resolve this in further discussion

  • investigate: import a JEE5 project (help wanted)
  • investigate: export/publish a JEE5 project (help wanted)
  • validate a JEE5 project (help wanted)
  • JSR 181 (annotations for web services) - we won't add any specifics, but the annotation processor could handle that (Bob Fraser)

JPA / Dali

Neil Hauge walks through plan (plan on wiki has been updated before the meeting) [2]

  • working on 1.0 as part of webtools 2.0


  • ecosystem integration (better integration platform, webtools, datatools, orm-xml) - 'in plan'
  • extensibility (major focus for 1.0 - 'in plan')
  • Rich UI support for JPA XML descriptor - 'in plan'
  • usability: better validation, quick fixes, code assist 'some of that is not garantied, some depend on new features in JDT'

Wishlist vs. In plan (Bob Fraser) - see notes above in 'italic'


ATF requirements walkthrough by Geno [3]

  • not yet clear whether ATF will exit incubation with WTP 2.0
  • milestone2 planning:
    • try to improve javascript editing
    • porting jdt to a javascript development tools suite - code not yet available in CVS - get that into CVS hopefully soon
    • embedded mozilla browser (interesting new views, performance of existing, CSS tooling, DOM type ahead filtering)
    • improve install (today placeholder plugins - want to implement something similar to the wtp server adapters with automatic fetch)

overview bugzilla enhancement requests

open session for requirements

Rob Frost:

  • maven support - need BUG 128851 (could fall into Adopter readiness theme) - further discussion in wtp status meeting needed


Post Meeting Comments

  • I think it will be beneficial to WTP and a great way to focus on quality to include a specific goal for automated testing in the "QUALITY is a major theme for 2.0 - not a lot of new features, but resolving major bugs" quality item. For example, looking at the test coverage report for 2.0M1 there are currently 48 plug-ins that do not have any automated test coverage and a further 30 plug-ins that do not have at least 50% automated test coverage. (In contrast, there are 29 plug-ins that have at least 50% automated test coverage.) A specific goal of every plug-in having at least 50% coverage (or a statement of why 50% coverage is not obtainable, which it isn't for some UI plug-ins) can be set and the status of automated test coverage can then be followed up on in the weekly status calls. --Lawrence Mandel

Back to the top