Thanks for the responses so far. Comments in-line (in blue text).
Simon Lessard wrote:
Hi Matthias,
I guess that's a fair point about alpha release, I'll try to think of
some good milestone.
~ Simon
On Thu, Feb 26, 2009 at 2:25 AM, Matthias Wessendorf
<[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Hi
On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 9:50 PM, Simon Lessard
<[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
> Hi Michael,
>
> See inline.
>
>
> Regards,
>
> ~ Simon
>
> On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 3:38 PM, Michael Concini
<[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>>
>> Now that the JSF 2.0 spec is getting closer to completion, I
think it
>> would be a good idea for some more planning to go into the
development
>> process for the MyFaces 2.0 release going forward. There are
several
>> aspects of this that need to be addressed.
>>
>> First, regarding the changes/additions to the JSF spec. Is
anyone keeping
>> track somewhere of which changes have JIRA issues attached
versus those that
>> still need to have new issues created? It is getting to be
hard to
>> determine what changes might still not have issues attached at
this point as
>> the number of JIRA issues associated with the 2.0 spec
approaches 200.
>
> The tickets matching the public review are all created. I'll do
another
> roundtrip with my team when the final spec is released to create
the missing
> ones. Basically Werner is working on the JavaScript API,
Leonardo and
> Jan-Kees help in various areas, I'm currently working on integrating
> Facelets and my teammate are helping me with that. One MAJOR
issue that we
> have right now are unit tests. Leonardo proposed to attack that
one, but
> since Shale might change his mind about the future of
Shale-test, I asked
> him to postpone dealing with it just in case so that we don't
have to work
> on that issue for nothing.
this maybe a bit off-topic, but we should start to put the shale-test
into myfaces.
Simon, I will write the (required) mail to the shale dev list and will
let the folks
here know about the outcome.
>
>>
>> Second, I think it would be very helpful to put together a more
detailed
>> road map of when we want to target specific changes and
features. I think a
>> good example of how we might want to do this is what
OpenWebBeans is doing
>> in their road map. They've outlined exactly what is being
planned for the
>> upcoming milestone work. I know something like this would be
very useful to
>> my team at IBM in determining which work is best for us to take
on in any
>> milestone period.
>
> I don't know if milestones are relevant when implementing a spec
considering
> what has to be done is fixed and static. I don't see any release
coming not
> passing the TCK, thus not implementing everything needed.
I think that some users/contributors would appreciate a milestone or
an alpha release.
Once we release something that hasn't passed the TCK we have to call
that aplha/milestone.
Geronimo did this in the past and so does the openwebbeans podling. I
wonder if we already
asked for a TCK, and I am not sure if that has TCK has some fields of
use restrictions (see [1] for
a larger discussion on the field of use restrictions). But we should
definitely ping SUN. Let me
take on that part.
Michael, if you are combing a committer (by providing patches) you can
also get access to run
the TCK (after signing a NDA) on your side. ;-)
Not sure what you mean by "combing a committer". As far as the TCK is
concerned though, we will have immediate access to the TCK at IBM once
Sun releases it. We'd be happy to run any alpha, beta and eventually
final releases of MyFaces 2.0 through the tck and work on fixing those
bugs.
>
>>
>> I also think it would be a good idea to come up with a more
formal way of
>> keeping track of who is working on which items. As more folks
become
>> involved, its going to become more and more likely that we'll
step on each
>> other's toes.
>
> I agree, but JIRA only allows to assign ticket to commiters and
I don't have
> anything better than adding a comment to the ticket for now. If
you have a
> better idea it would be welcome.
Perhaps we could use the wiki ? Like creating an umbrella MyFaces
2.0 items wiki
page, which "links" the all the subtasks / issues .
Using the wiki may not be a bad idea. If we were to do that though, one
thing that would be of great help to my team at least would be to have
the work items mapped back to the changes in the spec where possible.
Even something as simple as an which section/subsection the change comes
from. I'd be happy to help out with that work, but I would guess Simon
or someone from his team could do it more efficiently since they did the
initial breakdown of the work into the JIRA issues.
>
>>
>> Does anyone have thoughts on any of the above? I'd be glad to
work with
>> someone from the PMC to assist in any of the required planning.
Michael, the right channel to communicate on the development of
Apache MyFaces
is this mailing list. If you/your team has questions, the best is to
use something
like [myfaces 2.0] in the beginning of the subject, so a mail can be
filtered easily.
We usually use other resources, like JIRA or the MyFaces wiki ([2]) to
"organize"
the work. You can create an account on those services and
contribute some work
there as well.
If you have more questions, please ask them here, as the community
is more than
willing to answer them.
-Matthias
[1] http://www.apache.org/jcp/sunopenletter.html
[2] http://wiki.apache.org/myfaces/
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Mike Concini
>
>
--
Matthias Wessendorf
blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
