Scheduled a meeting to discuss and finalize things quickly. Please do let me know if you have trouble taking part.
Cheers, Prabath On Mon, Aug 10, 2015 at 6:11 PM, Dinusha Senanayaka <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Prabath, > > On Mon, Aug 10, 2015 at 3:22 PM, Prabath Abeysekera <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> Hi Dinusha, >> >> On Mon, Aug 10, 2015 at 3:05 PM, Dinusha Senanayaka <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> Prabath, we don't have any ball pass here. AppM next release is based on >>> kernel-4.4.1 that's our road map decision and we don't see any reason to go >>> with 4.4.0 while 4.4.1 available and I pointed set of issues/reasons in >>> previous mail as well. >>> >> >> Let me rephrase what I said earlier. MDM team doesn't have any objection >> against "next AppManager version" being shipped on top of Carbon 4.4.1, >> which is orthogonal to what was discussed. All we asked for previously is a >> "app-mgt component" release, which is depending on Carbon 4.4.0, to be >> shipped with EMM 2.0.0. >> >> Anyway, please consider that this is all sorted. Now that both parties >> agree that we can go ahead with 4.4.1, let's please stick to that plan. Can >> you guys also please give us an ETA as to when the next app-mgt component >> release will be out? That'd be helpful to us in terms of planning AppM >> integration bits well in advance. >> > > We can do a component release within this week using the appm current > master. But we have few concerns, please check whether it's OK to proceed > with them. > - We are working on some web app new features and those are available in > the current master, but we haven't done proper QA for these yet. I think > this should be OK with you guys since, you don't touch web-app functionality > - We have added some new feature/improvements to mobile apps as well. But > those are properly dev tested. > - We don't have done full QA testing after 4.4.1 migration, only basic > functional testing has done. You might have to test with MDM. > > Regards, > Dinusha. > > >> >> Cheers, >> Prabath >> >> >>> >>> Anyway, I thought problem is already sorted since you said, 4.4.1 >>> upgrade didn't give you any issues and gonna proceed with it ? >>> >>> On Mon, Aug 10, 2015 at 2:33 PM, Prabath Abeysekera <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> On Mon, Aug 10, 2015 at 12:09 PM, Dinusha Senanayaka <[email protected]> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Hi Prabath, >>>>> >>>>> Regarding the option 2 given and your feedback on it, >>>>> >>>>> IMO, the solution given by you doesn't fit us because of following >>>>> reasons, >>>>> - We got to know that there are lot of fixes included in kernel-4.4.1 >>>>> over 4.4.0. Hazelcast upgrade, Registry life cycles are not working on >>>>> mounted environment and the list of L1 fixes done [1] are the best >>>>> examples. So knowingly kernel-4.4.0 is buggy with these issues and fixes >>>>> are already available with kernel-4.4.1, we do not want to do AppM new >>>>> release with kernel-4.4.0. >>>>> >>>> >>>> AFAIK, quite a few teams have already started developing on top of >>>> 4.4.0. The model put forward after discussing with all is that, you depend >>>> on a specific kernel version and if there's going to be any issue, the >>>> underlying kernel functionalities have to be patched. If we're not >>>> following this practice, I don't really see why the aforementioned practice >>>> was recommended, in the first place. Further, as I've already pointed out, >>>> if we are forced to update the kernel version we're currently depending on >>>> just because of some bug in a one component, that's pretty unfortunate and >>>> has to be fixed in an appropriate manner. >>>> >>>> Not only that, if 4.4.0 is considered to be buggy, we would expect an >>>> official notification from people who are maintaining the same to update >>>> all on going developments with Carbon Kernel 4.4.1 related dependencies. >>>> However, couldn't find anything of that sort, and also, didn't come across >>>> any blocking issues so far upon any of the MDM related functionalities, so >>>> why do you think we need to go out of the recommended practice? >>>> >>> I'm not sure whether issues given in here [1] should consider for MDM >>> and whether patches are available for kernel-4.4.0. >>> >>> [1] https://wso2.org/jira/browse/CARBON-15146?filter=12323 >>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>>> [1] https://wso2.org/jira/browse/CARBON-15146?filter=12323 >>>>> >>>>> - And we suggest to create a new branch and maintain by your team >>>>> because AppM product doesn't have a requirement of releasing 4.4.0 based >>>>> repo for AppM product release. MDM having the requirement. Several teams >>>>> have done this as their requirements even though it's not the best option >>>>> and cause trouble for product team (here AppM) in support etc. >>>>> eg : 1. ES team had created separate branch for AppM 1.0.0 release >>>>> and we send pull requests for ES team. >>>>> https://github.com/wso2/product-es/tree/app-manager >>>>> >>>>> >>>> No, we don't intend to maintain any source branch owned by the AppM >>>> team, which doesn't scale as I'd pointed out already. >>>> >>>> >>>>> 2. IS team had created a separate branch for APIM/ AppM releases based >>>>> on kernel-4.2.0 since their release is based on kernel 4.4.x. >>>>> https://github.com/wso2/carbon-identity/tree/release-4.2.5 >>>>> >>>>> 3. APIM team had created new synapse version for their release and >>>>> took the responsibility of it. >>>>> >>>>> There should be many other scenarios like this as per the situation. >>>>> >>>> >>>> What we expect is not to "ball-pass" but to get the appropriate >>>> components released by the teams who are owning them. So, I'd be glad if we >>>> could urgently have some help from your team to get this sorted out. >>>> >>>> Cheers, >>>> Prabath >>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>>> Anyway, I think the problem is sorted now, since kernel-4.4.1 upgrade >>>>> works for you. >>>>> >>>>> Regards, >>>>> Dinusha. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Mon, Aug 10, 2015 at 10:27 AM, Prabath Abeysekera < >>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Hi Chanaka, >>>>>> >>>>>> On Monday, August 10, 2015, Chanaka Fernando <[email protected]> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Hi Prabath, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> We have upgraded from kernel 4.4.0 to 4.4.1 with the ESB 4.9.0 Beta >>>>>>> release. We were using 4.4.0 up until Alpha release and we have upgraded >>>>>>> carbon-mediation, wso2-axis2-transports and product-esb to use kernel >>>>>>> 4.4.1 >>>>>>> with Beta release. We haven't encountered any issue after upgrading into >>>>>>> 4.4.1. Your arguments might be correct. But I think you can give it a >>>>>>> try >>>>>>> to upgrade your components to kernel 4.4.1. I am suggesting this to you >>>>>>> from the experience we gained from ESB beta release. >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Thanks for the feedback. Sure, let me give it a try and see. >>>>>> >>>>>> Cheers, >>>>>> Prabath >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>> Chanaka >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Mon, Aug 10, 2015 at 8:50 AM, Prabath Abeysekera < >>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Hi Dinusha, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Thanks for taking time to help us with this. Please find my >>>>>>>> comments inline. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Sun, Aug 9, 2015 at 11:38 PM, Dinusha Senanayaka < >>>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Hi MDM Team, >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Initial plan was to release AppM-1.1.0 release based on >>>>>>>>> carbon-4.4.0. But due to some issues in the synapse version released >>>>>>>>> with >>>>>>>>> carbon-4.4.0, we need to move to Synapse 2.1.3.wso2v6 which will >>>>>>>>> be released with ESB 4.9.0. For that the the >>>>>>>>> carbon.meadiation.feature should be 4.4.3 which eventually depends on >>>>>>>>> carbon 4.4.1. And there are some registry related issues that fixed in >>>>>>>>> carbon-4.4.1. Because of these reasons we have to move AppM release to >>>>>>>>> carbon-4.4.1. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Since you guys need AppM mobile features to be included into MDM, >>>>>>>>> you have two options here, >>>>>>>>> 1. Move MDM release also into carbon-4.4.1 >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> The team can surely consider going for this option, but, only as >>>>>>>> the last resort. We'd already released a number of milestones upon >>>>>>>> Carbon >>>>>>>> 4.4.0, so if we're forced to upgrade everything to use Carbon 4.4.1 (In >>>>>>>> other words, adapting a "new" kernel release) just to fix a bug in one >>>>>>>> of >>>>>>>> the dependent components, approaching EMM 2.0.0 Alpha in less than a >>>>>>>> month, >>>>>>>> then there's a problem in the system that needs to be fixed. I do >>>>>>>> understand the fact that the release number (i.e. 4.4.1) suggests that >>>>>>>> it >>>>>>>> is a patch release, so, unlikely that there'd by any API changes, etc >>>>>>>> around. Therefore, one might think it is a straight forward task to >>>>>>>> upgrade >>>>>>>> all "device-mgt" components to use the latest version of Carbon kernel. >>>>>>>> However, unfortunately, it's not only about device-mgt related >>>>>>>> components, >>>>>>>> but quite a few other stuff as well. In other words, there should be >>>>>>>> quite >>>>>>>> a few other components that depend on 4.4.0, which would need to be >>>>>>>> upgraded as well. I wouldn't take that risk to upgrade them all at this >>>>>>>> stage of the release, just to get an issue fixed in one of the >>>>>>>> components. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> 2. Since MDM doesn't require AppM gateway features, we could >>>>>>>>> create a separate branch for you only with store/publisher/mobile >>>>>>>>> features >>>>>>>>> based on carbon-4.4.0 and you have to maintain the branch. (AppM >>>>>>>>> master is >>>>>>>>> still based on carbon-4.4.0, we could create this branch before we >>>>>>>>> upgrade >>>>>>>>> it to carbon-4.4.1) >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> AFAIK, the process demands us to release all components maintained >>>>>>>> in a particular repository at once. So, I don't quite think releasing >>>>>>>> individual components is possible. On the other hand, this just >>>>>>>> appears to >>>>>>>> be a "patch solution", which doesn't seem scale well going forward. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Also, I'm a little concerned by the statement, "*based on >>>>>>>> carbon-4.4.0 and you have to maintain the branch*". Why would some >>>>>>>> other team "maintain" app-mgt source branches? If this is about fixing >>>>>>>> bugs, etc that the EMM team comes across while adapting app-mgt related >>>>>>>> components, we ourselves would anyway go for it as time permits. >>>>>>>> However, >>>>>>>> creating some branch and asking other teams to "maintain" the same is >>>>>>>> against collaborate development, IMO. If you create a new version of >>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>> components, that will at some point be used by the "whole platform". >>>>>>>> So, >>>>>>>> asking some other team to "maintain" the components owned by your >>>>>>>> team, as >>>>>>>> you can obviously see, does not seem to scale. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> With all the above considered, I'm suggesting the following, which >>>>>>>> I think is the best option. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> * Update "carbon.mediation.feature" to use "2.1.3.wso2v6" and make >>>>>>>> its version something like "4.5.*" (ESB team can probably decide on a >>>>>>>> proper version number if what's suggested doesn't appear to be good). >>>>>>>> The >>>>>>>> idea is, even though 4.4.1 appears to be a patch release of Carbon >>>>>>>> 4.4.0, >>>>>>>> it has to be a big deal for a component to adapt to a new kernel >>>>>>>> version. >>>>>>>> Also, IMO, each and every component should let us have enough room to >>>>>>>> fix >>>>>>>> bugs of an already released version that depends on the Kernel version >>>>>>>> it >>>>>>>> was originally released upon. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> * Next, create a new version of "carbon.mediation.feature", which >>>>>>>> depends on Carbon 4.4.0 and upgrade its synapse version to be " >>>>>>>> 2.1.3.wso2v6". This is what needs to be used by the app-mgt >>>>>>>> components. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> * Get the app-mgt repo released so that the EMM can then adapt all >>>>>>>> required components on top of Carbon Kernel 4.4.0. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Please do let me know if you think it's going to be challenging to >>>>>>>> get the above to work, or if you need further clarifications. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Cheers, >>>>>>>> Prabath >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Let us know the preferred option for MDM release. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Regards, >>>>>>>>> Dinusha. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>> Dinusha Dilrukshi >>>>>>>>> Associate Technical Lead >>>>>>>>> WSO2 Inc.: http://wso2.com/ >>>>>>>>> Mobile: +94725255071 >>>>>>>>> Blog: http://dinushasblog.blogspot.com/ >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>> Prabath Abeysekara >>>>>>>> Technical Lead >>>>>>>> WSO2 Inc. >>>>>>>> Email: [email protected] >>>>>>>> Mobile: +94774171471 >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>>> Dev mailing list >>>>>>>> [email protected] >>>>>>>> http://wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dev >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> Chanaka Fernando >>>>>>> Senior Technical Lead >>>>>>> WSO2, Inc.; http://wso2.com >>>>>>> lean.enterprise.middleware >>>>>>> >>>>>>> mobile: +94 773337238 >>>>>>> Blog : http://soatutorials.blogspot.com >>>>>>> LinkedIn:http://www.linkedin.com/pub/chanaka-fernando/19/a20/5b0 >>>>>>> Twitter:https://twitter.com/chanakaudaya >>>>>>> Wordpress:http://chanakaudaya.wordpress.com >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> Dinusha Dilrukshi >>>>> Associate Technical Lead >>>>> WSO2 Inc.: http://wso2.com/ >>>>> Mobile: +94725255071 >>>>> Blog: http://dinushasblog.blogspot.com/ >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Prabath Abeysekara >>>> Technical Lead >>>> WSO2 Inc. >>>> Email: [email protected] >>>> Mobile: +94774171471 >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Dinusha Dilrukshi >>> Associate Technical Lead >>> WSO2 Inc.: http://wso2.com/ >>> Mobile: +94725255071 >>> Blog: http://dinushasblog.blogspot.com/ >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> Prabath Abeysekara >> Technical Lead >> WSO2 Inc. >> Email: [email protected] >> Mobile: +94774171471 >> > > > > -- > Dinusha Dilrukshi > Associate Technical Lead > WSO2 Inc.: http://wso2.com/ > Mobile: +94725255071 > Blog: http://dinushasblog.blogspot.com/ > -- Prabath Abeysekara Technical Lead WSO2 Inc. Email: [email protected] Mobile: +94774171471
_______________________________________________ Dev mailing list [email protected] http://wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dev
