On Mon, Dec 8, 2008 at 4:49 PM, Raymond Feng <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> +1 to associate the issues to the roadmap. We should try to identify > critical items from the survey results and connect them to the schemes for > future releases. Maybe we can open JIRA to track the issues and explicitly > target them to the specific releases. > > Thanks, > Raymond > > *From:* Simon Laws <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > *Sent:* Monday, December 08, 2008 8:05 AM > *To:* [email protected] > *Subject:* Re: Survey Results > > > > On Fri, Dec 5, 2008 at 5:40 AM, haleh mahbod <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> I moved the survey comments to the wiki and tried to put them into >> categories [1]. Feel free to move items into the right buckets if you think >> they are in the wrong category. My intention for categorization was to see >> where I see the highest concentration of similar requests. Documentation >> and samples stand out. I am going to start looking into these areas. I will >> start new email threads for these and look forward to your help. >> >> I have also added a column in the table to record status of how the >> feedback we received is being addressed. Please help update the table to >> help realize how the survey result is turning into action and results. >> >> [1]: >> http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/TUSCANYWIKI/Survey+Response >> >> Thanks, >> Haleh >> >> >> On Wed, Nov 19, 2008 at 2:28 AM, ant elder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >>> Here are the raw results from the user survey. The survey ran for two >>> weeks, there were 39 responses which is about 11% of the user list >>> subscribers. >>> >>> >>> 1. Which releases of Apache Tuscany do you use? >>> 1.2 12%, 1.2.1 5%, 1.3 9%, 1.3.1 14% 1.3.2 60% >>> >>> >>> 2. In what stage of development are you in? >>> Prototyping 53% Development 36% Production 11% >>> >>> >>> 3. What runtime platforms do you use? >>> Tomcat 43% JBoss 8% Vendor Specific 17% Standalone 31% >>> >>> >>> 4. Which technologies do you use in your solution? >>> JEE 24%, Spring 17%, J2SE 24%, Scripting Languages 3%, Non-Java(C, C++ >>> etc) 3%, OSGi 10%, BPEL 8%, ESB 5%, Other 3% >>> >>> >>> 5. If you answered "other" to the previous question, please indicate >>> what? >>> Eclipse, Hibernate, Groovy, JDO2 - JPA - JMS - Flex, web 2.0 >>> >>> >>> 6. Which SCA binding types do you use? >>> ATOM 4%, CORBA 1%, DWR 2%, EJB 7%, Feed 1%, HTTP 16%, JMS 14%, JSONRPC >>> 15%, RMI 10%, RSS 1%, Web Service 30% >>> >>> >>> 7. Which SCA implementation types do you use? >>> Java 47%, BPEL 11%, EJB 4%, OSGi 11%, Resource 1%, Script 4%, Spring 18%, >>> Widget 2%, XQuery 1% >>> >>> >>> 8. What additional bindings or implementation types would you like to >>> see? >>> C++, C, REST binding, .Net, Flex AMF, tcp and udp, hession, UDDI, >>> spring.ws >>> >>> >>> 9. How would you rate ease of installation and use? >>> Very Good 8%, Good 46%, Fair 36%, Poor 10% >>> >>> >>> 10. What suggestions do you have for improving this? >>> 1 The samples can be made more useful by having documentation >>> describing what the samples do and how they were built >>> 2 Get IBM to donate their SCA toolkit for Eclipse. IBM Tooling for >>> Service Component Architecture http://www.alphaworks.ibm.com/tech/scat >>> 3 I got some problems exposing an SCA compoent as a web service >>> running under Tomcat. Finally I succeed with the help of the Tuscany User >>> Forum but it would have been easier if I had a sample explaining how to do >>> that with Tomcat. I would like to use services exposed as EJB but here again >>> I'm not sure about the time it would take to me as I have not seen a sample >>> demonstrating this feature. >>> 4 Quality & Testing! >>> 5 The documentation is weak, i read the SCA_AssemblyModel_V100.pdf, >>> but i have difficult to learn about correct use of artifacts, example tag >>> have two attribute required (name and and promote) but the examples show >>> only name, and the execution don't warning about this. The tutorial have >>> many artifacts with .composite, componentType, contribution, workspace but >>> don't have documentation, I am creating a infra using SCA but don't know >>> about best practices using SCA. Sorry but i am brazilian and i have >>> difficult in write english. >>> 6 Better organized documentation, more elaborated documentation. >>> 7 You know much configuration accept several ways. If you just add >>> some comments in the artifacts in those samples bundled with Tuscany, that >>> will be very helpful for new comers including me. >>> 8 Better error handling messages. >>> 9 complete redesign, especially the classloading. Extremly improved >>> documentation. uptodat examples and tutorials. >>> 10 RMI reconnect balance strategy >>> 11 Build a standard distribution for Tomcat, JBoss, Jonas, ... >>> 12 more documents, more enterprise feature support, like transaction, >>> more samples >>> 13 improve documentation :)，package it and we can download. >>> 14 I found the tutorials were out of date compared to the latest >>> version. >>> 15 I think this is a terrific, terrific product and I want this to be >>> brought into the fold here at XXXX. We have a mish-mash of components to >>> build composites on - web services, RMI, etc. Documentation with working >>> examples is the key to adoption. I understand that it has mostly been >>> written by developers (and I'm one too :-) but it looks it. Simple use-cases >>> like: "So you want to call a web service outside of the domain, here's what >>> you need to do." >>> 16 Better examples for async (true pub-sub with ActiveMQ), conversation >>> support, cross-domain, more robust security policy examples (simplest >>> possible example using OpenLDAP, for example) >>> >>> >>> 11. If you have not adopted Tuscany yet, what would help you make that >>> decision? >>> 1 Three things: - support for Non-Java-Technologies - dynamic wiring - >>> cross-domain communication. >>> 2 Seamless integration with JBoss. >>> 3 More documentation, and tips of architecture using SCA. >>> 4 Moving to OSGi Easy deployment of SCA components Support for >>> clustering: load balancing, failover and resiliency Support for distributed >>> service discovery Support for QOS >>> 5 Heavy and slow >>> 6 spring call tuscany >>> 7 More stable solution. There are still some "important" bugs on the >>> implementation. >>> 8 Clear documentation, and we're yours! I realize looking at code is >>> good - but code+docs is the way to go. >>> 9 Distributed domain >>> >>> >>> 12. How is your choice of SCA helping your business? >>> 1 At the moment I am looking at the Tuscany solution in order to show >>> with simple examples to the rest of the team how it can be used to develop >>> SOA like style architecture >>> 2 Reduces integration and development costs >>> 3 I thing the SCA is very good, this is couple with SOA Analisys >>> Design Requirements, and its very good, I see the book of Thomas Erl and is >>> easy mapping to SCA. But I need more documentation to best practices using >>> SCA. >>> 4 To support SOA development efforts >>> 5 Same style of developing business logic(in both Java and C++). >>> 6 Low coupling components >>> 7 it's slowing it down >>> 8 For the moment is just R&D. In our mind it should be able to >>> complete(/replace?) a JEE approch >>> 9 better architecture >>> 10 Tuscany and SCA are an excellent platform for research into SOA. >>> 11 It will help us by being able to turn solutions around much more >>> quickly in a more decoupled manner. >>> 12 greater flexibility >>> 13 Low coupling component >>> >>> >>> 13. Do you have any other comments on what might improve Apache Tuscany? >>> 1 We need a tuscany management console >>> 2 We very much like Tuscany but are having a few problems. We want to >>> be able to create Tuscany OSGI bundles but are having a lot of problems with >>> that. Also 1.3 seems to have broken calling Axis2 web services directly as a >>> component. We'd also like to interop C++ and C# components and Java >>> components. There's a lot of promise for this technology but we're having a >>> difficult time combining the technologies we want to use with it. >>> 3 Better integration between OpenJPA and SDO. The project Fluid is >>> what I'm looking for. >>> 4 The only thing missing from Tuscany is a binding which uses dynamic >>> discovery, eg. via UDDI. This would provide then provide a framework that >>> would facilitate the implementation and study of SOA systems. I'd like to >>> get involved with adding this binding to Tuscany, but I don't have enough >>> knowledge of the code or UDDI as yet. >>> 5 More examples (see above). The Tuscany tools for Eclipse have made >>> major enhancements lately, thanks a lot for those. >>> 6 DAS is not updated. Hibernate or other JPA integration. >>> >>> >>> >>> >> > How do we best ensure that some of these thoughts make it into the roadmap? > There's a danger that having them on a wiki page means it gets forgotten > about. I've linked this page from the roadmap page [1] fto encourage people > to look at the survey results when they are looking at how to evolve the > roadmap. > > Simon > > [1] > http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/TUSCANYWIKI/Java+SCA+Roadmap >
