On Fri, Aug 16, 2013 at 5:28 PM, Chris Geer <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 16, 2013 at 2:13 PM, Erin Noe-Payne 
> <[email protected]>wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Aug 16, 2013 at 4:00 PM, Chris Geer <[email protected]> wrote:
>> > On Fri, Aug 16, 2013 at 12:56 PM, Matt Franklin <
>> [email protected]>wrote:
>> >
>> >> On Fri, Aug 16, 2013 at 3:33 PM, Erin Noe-Payne <
>> [email protected]
>> >> >wrote:
>> >>
>> >> > On Fri, Aug 16, 2013 at 3:18 PM, Matt Franklin <
>> [email protected]
>> >> >
>> >> > wrote:
>> >> > > On Fri, Aug 16, 2013 at 3:15 PM, Gornstein, Daniel S.
>> >> > > <[email protected]>wrote:
>> >> > >
>> >> > >> Matt,
>> >> > >>
>> >> > >> What is the upside of merging the branch into trunk before it is
>> done
>> >> or
>> >> > >> more complete?
>> >> > >>
>> >> > >>
>> >> > > IMO, working off of trunk makes it more "real" for everyone.  I
>> think
>> >> it
>> >> > > should only be done if we are within 1-2 months of it being
>> releasable.
>> >> > >
>> >> >
>> >> > That feels like an ambitious schedule to me. I see 1 month as no
>> >> > chance, and 2 months as very tight at best.
>> >> >  - There is a lot of outstanding api work to fill in missing or
>> >> > incomplete endpoints
>> >> >  - We need to make changes to some models so that transitions (f.e.
>> >> > moving widgets between regions and pages) become state-based
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >> Can you what you mean by this a little more?
>>
>> Say I want to move a regionWidget from one page to another. A
>> regionWidget does not have a pageId property, so I can not make a
>> change to its state and save to a restful endpoint. Similar problem
>> for re-ordering portal pages. So we need to either update the models
>> to have these references and then ensure that the controller / service
>> layer detects the state changes and propagates accordingly, OR we need
>> to implement special "action" rest endpoints on these models like
>> /regionWidgets/1/move. I prefer the former but either will work.
>>
>
> Wouldn't you update the page and add the regionWidget to a region on a
> page, and remove it from another one?
>

I guess that's true. I'm guess I was just thinking there should be one
atomic operation.

>>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> >  - We need to harden the service layer to protect against data
>> corruption
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >> Yes, but we currently have this in trunk...
>> >>
>>
>> I don't think we do? I sent an email to the dev list a few days ago
>> about how the page service will let you set a null layout code. I
>> think there are more examples if you start to dig, but that is all in
>> trunk.
>>
>> >>
>> >> >  - We need to re-implement all of the front end as angular apps
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> What is the state of this re-implementation?
>> >>
>>
>> The portal is roughly 1 week in progress. Profile, widget store, admin
>> panel, login, and anything else you can think of are not started.
>> Progress will accelerate but each context will still have its share of
>> custom work.
>>
>> >>
>> >> >  - We need to solve some pretty major architecture questions like...
>> >> >    - The entire authentication / authorization model
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >> Authentication I agree, while the current authorization model is not
>> >> optimal, it should still work, right?
>> >>
>>
>> Yes but it should be better and I think we will start to feel the pain
>> when we think hard about generic contexts instead of just the two
>> cases we have in place currently, so it's on my mind.
>>
>> >>
>> >> >    - How we will now handle internationalization
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> The client messages js endpoint should still work, right?
>> >>
>>
>> Essentially, but it will need to be expanded because much of the
>> messaging that used to be in jsp's and was never added to client
>> messages will now happen in angular. Having said that, require and
>> angular both have built in internationalization support, so it may
>> make more sense to go with the grain and use one of those than roll
>> our own.
>>
>> >>
>> >> >    - How are we going to handle client-side view composition to keep
>> >> > it from being to chatty
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >> +1
>>
>> I have a concept here for an angular service that works in the spirit
>> of requirejs, in which any directive, service, etc can declare its
>> 'view dependencies', which can then be requested en mass via a server
>> side endpoint and cached. But that's conceptual only at this point.
>>
>> >>
>> >> Fair enough.  I haven't seen much discussion of state of the branch
>> except
>> >> for Jira tickets, so this helps.  IMO, some of these things feel a lot
>> like
>> >> they need to be solved by V1, but not necessarily before branch merge.
>> >>
>>
>> Of course; the merge can happen once 0.23 is released. This list is
>> with respect to 1-2 months until angular is releasable.
>>
>> >
>> > Matt brings up a good point here. I know there is a lot of work going on
>> > but I'm assuming that since the JIRA tickets are pretty lean (not much
>> > detail) you are using other methods to coordinate work between people. Is
>> > there other communications that can be moved to the list so we can all
>> stay
>> > abreast of what's going on?
>> >
>>
>> Work on the angular branch started in earnest on monday - previous
>> that the focus has been entirely on trunk and apis. This list of
>> issues has not really been discussed beyond what has shown up on the
>> list - it's mostly just a brain dump of what I have been thinking
>> about.
>>
>> There has been some discussion off the list about the tasking for the
>> angular tickets - I will be more transparent in tasking and discussion
>> going forward.
>>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> >
>> >> > >
>> >> > >
>> >> > >> This causes people to not be able to use snapshot, and not release
>> any
>> >> > bug
>> >> > >> fixes into trunk if you find something which needs attention right
>> >> away.
>> >> > >>
>> >> > >
>> >> > > Good point, but if we absolutely have to, we can release bugs out
>> of a
>> >> > > branch that we create from 0.23 tag.
>> >> > >
>> >> > >
>> >> > >>
>> >> > >> Thanks,
>> >> > >> Daniel Gornstein
>> >> > >>
>> >> > >> -----Original Message-----
>> >> > >> From: Matt Franklin [mailto:[email protected]]
>> >> > >> Sent: Friday, August 16, 2013 3:09 PM
>> >> > >> To: [email protected]
>> >> > >> Subject: 0.23 Release & Angular Merge
>> >> > >>
>> >> > >> We are coming up on the end of the month and IMO, it would be a
>> good
>> >> > idea
>> >> > >> to do a Rave release for 0.23 that includes the requirejs and
>> Shindig
>> >> > 2.5
>> >> > >> final changes.
>> >> > >>
>> >> > >> To support this, I have been committing minor bug fixes as I find
>> >> them,
>> >> > but
>> >> > >> it would be good to get everyone who is able checking the current
>> >> state
>> >> > and
>> >> > >> logging anything that needs to be fixed.
>> >> > >>
>> >> > >> I also see that Erin has been very active on the angular branch.
>> >>  Given
>> >> > >> that it is now the major thrust of the project, what would everyone
>> >> > think
>> >> > >> about merging that branch back to trunk after the 0.23 release?  We
>> >> > would
>> >> > >> then wait to do a 0.24 release until after the Angular code is
>> ready.
>> >> > >>
>> >> >
>> >>
>>

Reply via email to