[11:34] <kgoodson> hi all, I have just joined a little late and am
reviewing the discussion so far -- when there is a natural break i'd
like to raise the agenda issue i tabled in tuscany-dev
[11:34] <ant_> kgoodson, go for it
[11:35] <Venkat> ok.. I am removing all of axis2 dependencies from tools
pom and adding them to sca pom... is that ok
[11:35] <cr22rc> lets see if jboynes shows up and give us his thougts
[11:36] <lresende> Venkat: today's page does not require scrolling
[11:36] <kgoodson> ok, well, my IPMC vote that I kicked off on 10/25
has a lot of discussion on the thread -- no show stopping issues, only
advisory. I have been pursuing and addressing all the advisory issues
in order to try and make things progress
[11:36] <Venkat> lresende: that is because we are yet to update it with
documentation... what is there is minimal..
[11:37] <kgoodson> the reviewers so far have said that there is nothing
to stop them +1ing it, but haven't done so. What should I do?
[11:37] * rfeng has joined #tuscany
[11:37] <cr22rc> I guess we should table the sca m2 pom.xml and website
discussion ... and stick to one thread ... pick those up later
[11:37] <Venkat> if we ended up making avg amoutn of docs for SCA DAS
and SDO... I am most certain that you will have to scroll pages
[11:38] <ant_> Venkat, i'm not convinced about having everything in the
sca pom.xml
[11:38] <cr22rc> let please stick to one thread.
[11:38] <Venkat> yes.. lets wrap the pom up...
[11:38] <cr22rc> continue those later
[11:39] <simonnash> sorry I missed the start of the docs discussion. a
bit of scrolling is OK, but I am not sure how much is envisaged.
[11:39] <cr22rc> I think we should continue with kgoodson scheduled
topic first
[11:40] <ant_> me too
[11:40] <Venkat> ok..
[11:41] <kgoodson> thanks guys, so any advice on how best to get thios
moving without getting on the wrong side the IPMC members?
[11:41] <ant_> if we completely happy with the SDO M2 as is then just
kick off a new clean ipmc vote
[11:41] <cr22rc> Kgoodson: can you requst they vote ?
[11:41] <ant_> or cut a new one including any fixes to the original
[11:41] <kgoodson> i posted to my vote thread 11/3 to draw their
attanetion to it. So ant, is that the best way forward? Just start a
new vote thread?
[11:42] <simonnash> which are the fixes that seem most important (if any)?
[11:43] <kgoodson> so to be clear, the issues have been in the main
categrized into possible -1 type issues, and advisory issues which are
deemed to be important
[11:43] <kgoodson> the only issue in the first category was with our
STATUS file
[11:43] <cr22rc> Maybe start it off, and high light what you've fixed
to show you were responsive.
[11:43] <kgoodson> and that has been addressed. It appeard that some
CCLAs were still pending
[11:44] <kgoodson> the rest of the issues were documented to be
advisory, such as distro layout
[11:44] <kgoodson> manifest contents, ...
[11:44] <ant_> there is a difference btw -1 issues and enough niggles
that by themselves aren't -1 but add up to people not really wantting to
+1 it either
[11:44] <kgoodson> i have appended to my thread detailing all that i
have done to address each issue
[11:46] <kgoodson> sure, and I have needed to make the judgement call
as to whether I should sepnd the cycles to respin the release candidate
and start off a new PPMC vote, thus setting us back a week
[11:46] * meeraj_away has joined #tuscany
[11:46] <cr22rc> If you start off a new vote thread can't hurt to hilite
and summarize what you've done IMO
[11:46] * meeraj_away is now known as meerajk
[11:46] <kgoodson> some of the issues that have been raised I have
addressed by reporting why thins are as they are and why I would find it
difficult to adopt the suggestions
[11:47] <kgoodson> ok cr22rc that sounds like good advice
[11:48] <simonnash> kgoodson, i am having trouble finding the append
deswcribing what you have done to address the comments
[11:48] <kgoodson> i think my current thread is so long that it is
off-putting to the reviewers
[11:48] <lresende> or maybe wait for one more day and see how DAS vote
goes... and go for the cr22rc advice
[11:48] <cr22rc> Maybe you should get in touch with our project mentors
and get there input.
[11:48] <Venkat> yes, that's a sure way out
[11:49] <kgoodson> simonnash its on incubator general, title "RATIFY
PPMC ..." first post is 10/25, there are about three appends to the thread
[11:49] <simonnash> lresende, i was surprised to see an IPMC DAS vote
given that you had (I thought) said that you were going to add a
tuscany- prefix to the files
[11:50] <kgoodson> thfull title of thread is --- [VOTE] - Ratify Tuscany
PPMC vote to release SDO for Java M2 artifacts
[11:51] <simonnash> kgoodson, sorry for confusion. i was looking in
tuscany-dev not the general incubator list
[11:51] <kgoodson> np
[11:51] <simonnash> last is from Robert saying he would have +1d
[11:51] <simonnash> that's a good sign
[11:52] <kgoodson> yes, but not quite a +1 in itself
[11:52] <simonnash> it seems to indicate that he would +1 if you started
a new vote thread
[11:52] <kgoodson> you type faster than me, i was going to say that too
[11:53] <kgoodson> so thats what i will do
[11:53] <kgoodson> unless any further comments, shall we close this and
move back to the docs discussion
[11:53] <kgoodson> ?
[11:53] <simonnash> sounds good
[11:53] <kgoodson> thanks
[11:55] <cr22rc> BTW... I think we need to add to the agenda to settle
if this is the time the IRC will now meet
[11:56] <simonnash> now?
[11:56] <simonnash> what time is it for you?
[11:56] <cr22rc> 11:57 for me
[11:57] <simonnash> sorry if I missed something. is there a suggestion
that a different time would be better?
[11:57] <cr22rc> we're actually an hour later GMT wise
[11:57] <simonnash> oh, i see. sorry for being dense
[11:58] <simonnash> this time is best for me
[11:59] <cr22rc> so 16:30 gmt ...
[11:59] <lresende> simonash: sorry, i tought I had said i missed that...
but do you guys think i should revoke the vote to add that ?
[12:00] <cr22rc> any objection to moving to 16:30 GMT ?
[12:00] <kgoodson> 16:30 GMT will be fine until the clocks go forward in
the spring!
[12:01] <kgoodson> then we will have to address the issue again
[12:01] <simonnash> i was not sure how to take your comment. whether
you meant to fix it now or fix it later. i would not say that this is
sufficient to revoke a vote that hard started now.
[12:01] <ant_> sorry just to be clear, its not really moving is it? its
the same real time?
[12:01] <kgoodson> the issue is that the tuscany site says 15:30 GMT
[12:02] <cr22rc> if you take an anglo-american point of view
[12:02] <cr22rc> or time I should say
[12:02] <kgoodson> so anyone coming new to the project would have
dropped in an hour early
[12:02] <ant_> right so its just a site updated not really a move?
[12:02] <lresende> simonnash: k, i have submitted a patch that fixes
that and also fix the problem around unzipping to current directory, but
that is on the trunk, and not for the M2 release
[12:03] <cr22rc> ant: yes for you (and me) ... but not for someone that
didn't set their clock back.
[12:03] <simonnash> sorry for misunderstanding. at this stage I would
let the vote go ahead and see what comments come back.
[12:03] <ant_> ok
[12:04] <simonnash> is there anyone on this chat that has a problem with
changing to 16.30 GMT until the US/Europe time change next spring?
[12:04] <cr22rc> so again 16:40 GMT ok ? any objections?
[12:05] <simonnash> venkat, i am not sure what this is doing to you.
[12:05] <meerajk> +1
[12:05] <simonnash> +1 from me for 16.30 GMT
[12:05] <ant_> this should be decided on the mailing list
[12:05] <simonnash> yes
[12:05] <simonnash> good point
[12:05] <simonnash> those who cannot make 16.30 GMT will not be on this
chat :-)
[12:06] <Venkat> so is that an hour early or an hour late now
[12:06] <meerajk> late
[12:06] <Venkat> either ways ok by me :) I am not going to miss the chat
[12:06] <kgoodson> osounds good, we just outght to put a notice in the
site either now or before the spring that for some observers the "wall
clock" for them time will change in the Spring
[12:06] <ant_> what time is it now for you venkat?
[12:07] <Venkat> about 10.45 PM
[12:07] <kgoodson> oops, bad inline editing, but you get the idea,
don't you ;-)
[12:07] * murphdg has quit IRC ("Konversation terminated!")
[12:09] <cr22rc> Ok so it's changed for now to 16:30 GMT
[12:09] <cr22rc> next topic?
[12:09] <simonnash> i thought we were foing to settle this on the
mailing list
[12:09] <simonnash> going
[12:09] <cr22rc> ok ... sorry missed ant's msg
[12:10] <simonnash> np. culd you post a proposal there and ask if
anyone objects?
[12:11] <cr22rc> I can propose the change to 16:30GM
[12:11] <simonnash> thanks
[12:13] <Venkat> ok website next ?
[12:13] <ant_> ok
[12:13] <simonnash> which is the page that is short now but will grow
longer soon?
[12:14] <Venkat> there is a documentation page that is short now...
[12:14] <simonnash> wihch one? I just built the latest zip
[12:14] <cr22rc> venkat your zip didn't have a publish ... right? or do
I have the wrong one?
[12:14] <Venkat> yes... just to save space
[12:14] <simonnash> i ran build.bat to create a site-publish
[12:15] <Venkat> simonnash: yes now open the index.html form
site-publish and browse around to get a feel..
[12:16] <simonnash> is index.html the page that is intended to grow longer?
[12:16] <Venkat> simonnash.. you must have to now switch to the public
website
[12:16] <Venkat> and take a look at the Documentation page there.. thats
the page we are talking about
[12:17] <cr22rc> I guess I see things differently. 90% of the people
are interested in C++ or Java not both. So if I'm looking SCA Java I'm
more like to be interested in SDO java than C++ java
[12:17] <cr22rc> .. than sca c++
[12:18] <simonnash> ok, i see the documentation page on the public
website. it is quite short at the moment
[12:18] <Venkat> hmm. good point
[12:18] <rfeng> vekant, I'm uploading your new site to my apache account
for other folks to review
[12:18] <Venkat> thanks rfeng
[12:19] <simonnash> so i'm osrry to be dense yet again, but I don't know
which page will grow to be long with lots of scrolling
[12:19] <Venkat> simonnash, thats the page I say will grow if we start
adding documents.. so I proposed that we categorize documentation...
into SCA, SDO and DAS and put them on diff. pages
[12:19] <simonnash> i would not do that
[12:20] <simonnash> i think a single reference with all the links is best
[12:20] <lresende> we were talking about :
http://incubator.apache.org/tuscany/documentation.html
[12:20] <simonnash> if we are only talking about links then it will not
get very long
[12:20] <simonnash> yes I am looking at that page now
[12:20] <lresende> i like that too... one central place for all links
[12:21] <ant_> i quite liek this way Venkat has it
[12:21] <cr22rc> I have to admit too... while they seemed at tad
unorganzied I liked the look of the top tabs
[12:21] <simonnash> i cannoyt find htis page in the zip file that Venkat
sent
[12:21] <lresende> yes, that's the issue, he got rid of the page, and
create a documentation page for each project
[12:22] <simonnash> ok i understand now. at last :-)
[12:22] <cr22rc> I can see two download pages one for C++ and one for Java
[12:22] <rfeng> here's the new site from Venkat @
http://people.apache.org/~rfeng/tuscany/site-publish/
[12:25] <simonnash> venkat, do you envisage all the placeholders on your
SCA Docs page being replaced by live links?
[12:25] <Venkat> yes
[12:27] <rfeng> venkat, one thing I'm seeing is that the mouse hover is
a bit messed up with links such as "SCA Downloads" where its bold
version doesn't fit in one line
[12:27] <simonnash> maybe there could be a high-level docs page that
points out to sub-pages. one such sub-page could contains all these
links for the Tuscany SCA Java impl
[12:28] <Venkat> rfeng: will fix that.. thanks
[12:28] <simonnash> the structure of your Tuscany SCA Java impl page is good
[12:28] <ant_> those type of things can be incrementally fixed over time
if its somewhere we can all up date it
[12:29] <simonnash> we need the low-level for those who want this detail
and the high-level for those who want to see the big picture
[12:30] <Venkat> my perspective is that the high level view would be
given by the 'Tuscany Overview' and Getting Started kind of pages..
[12:30] <simonnash> yes, let's iterate on this together. Venkat has
made a very good start.
[12:30] <Venkat> after which one would prob. get started with either one
of SCa or das or sdo
[12:30] <rfeng> ant_, do you have any idea where we can collaboratively
update the site?
[12:31] <Venkat> thats when the docs come in handy..
[12:31] <simonnash> for High level I mean a page with links to specsw,
white papers, impl docs, etc
[12:31] <simonnash> really a references page with links rather than
words like Getting Started has
[12:31] <cr22rc> Hmm.. like I said seem like if I'm interested now in
java and in picking up SDO, DAS, SCA ... I need to drop to three
seperate pages.
[12:32] <Venkat> the docs under sca sdo and das are all high level
only... they will link to detail docs.
[12:32] <rfeng> cr22rc, I think you have a good point
[12:32] <lresende> cr22rc: yes, good point
[12:32] <Venkat> yes... so shall be re-org as 'Tuscany Java' and Tuscany C++
[12:32] <rfeng> we need to decide the order of sorting :-) by language
1st, or by sca/sdo/das 1st
[12:33] <Venkat> i think cr22rc is practical
[12:33] <cr22rc> I was thinking solving that page length with
collapseable sections
[12:33] <simonnash> venkat, i am not quite sure what you mean. do you
mean something like Transport Bindings on the SCA Java page links to
further lower-level docs?
[12:34] <Venkat> yes... a document that will discuss about Transport
bindings in general and then what is available in Tuscany as of date..
how you use them etc.
[12:34] <Venkat> that would be quite some content isn't it - to be on
its own page
[12:35] <rfeng> I think we can have a two-type tab at the right-most top
position to switch between C++ and Java versions?
[12:35] <simonnash> ok, then we have a hierarchy. question is what
comes at the top of the hierarchy. maybe for now we get the content in
place and can organize the top level later
[12:36] <simonnash> but we do need to decide whether the first level
split is by runtime language or by technology
[12:36] <cr22rc> refeng... just the download page or the whole site?
[12:36] <Venkat> yes rfeng, then all of what you see on the left pane
must align with either C++ or Java
[12:36] <rfeng> maybe the whole site
[12:36] <simonnash> i am not so keen on having a big divide between the
worlds of C++ and java. Over time I see these coming closer together.
[12:37] <cr22rc> I've given that some consideration... but it does not
solve easily when you don't have state
[12:37] <Venkat> it cant be that the tabs and panes work
independently... that was quite confusing for me
[12:38] <cr22rc> that happens on other sites
[12:38] <cr22rc> there is no required link
[12:38] <rfeng> Do you guys like the structure of
http://logging.apache.org/?
[12:39] <cr22rc> http://geronimo.apache.org/index.html
[12:39] <rfeng> The 1st level covers all the common things
[12:39] <rfeng> then it goes down to individual subprojects
[12:39] <cr22rc> the top index has no correlation to the side
[12:39] <simonnash> but we do not have subprojects
[12:40] <ant_> i need to go soon, is there anything else left on this
or just this website stuff?
[12:40] <simonnash> we decided that tuscany was a signle project
[12:40] <rfeng> any feedbacks on the distros?
[12:41] * anita has left #tuscany
[12:41] <Venkat> ant the pom stuff
[12:42] <cr22rc> also I created a wiki to collaborate on the what's new
for m2.. do we plan on using that ?
[12:42] <simonnash> The Geronimo site looks very slick
[12:42] <cr22rc> Venkat: don't change the structure of the pom.xml right
now maybe just use the same property
[12:42] <Venkat> I would not agree... you have tabs and nav panes all
doing the same thing...
[12:43] <rfeng> cr22rc, can you create the page so that we can all
contribute to it? I agree with you that we can start with the list from
the M2 tasks one
[12:43] <cr22rc> Venkat.. I've seen that pattern used many times. I
don't have an issue with it.
[12:43] <ant_> we can fix the poms when we get axis 1.1 final, just
change the sanpshot oto 1.1RC2 may be easiest for now
[12:44] <cr22rc> rfeng ... I've done that already
[12:44] <rfeng> cool
[12:44] <Venkat> ok ant
[12:44] <rfeng> did you send the link to dev-list?
[12:44] <cr22rc> yes
[12:44] <rfeng> ant, 1.1RC2 for axis2?
[12:45] <Venkat> yes rfeng
[12:45] <cr22rc> ?
[12:46] <rfeng> so the axis2 team made 1.1RC2 as a version for their
maven artifacts?
[12:47] <cr22rc> But that's only in a private repo ... why not
1.1-SNAPSHOT ?
[12:47] <rfeng> I'm OK to stick with 1.1-SNAPSHOT
[12:47] <rfeng> that way, we're always in sync with axis21.1
[12:47] <ant_> really we just need to make sure we can work with what
the 1.1 final, it doesn't mater so much
[12:48] <cr22rc> I checked in the top level already to 1.1-SNAPSHOT.
[12:49] <rfeng> I saw it
[12:49] <simonnash> i need to leave now
[12:49] <cr22rc> I think we should change the lower reference to axis to
at least use the ${axis2Version} property
[12:50] * simonnash has quit IRC ("Bye")
[12:50] <cr22rc> ant are you ok with that ?
[12:51] <Venkat> that's what was in mind too
[12:51] <Venkat> just use ${axis2Version}
[12:51] <cr22rc> it less radical but make sure you at least you dont'
fall into the trap I did this weekend thinking only change the top was
sufficient.
[12:51] * kgoodson has quit IRC (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by
peer))
[12:51] <ant_> i really don't know about these dependencies in the sca
pom. would we put all the dependency versions there - javascript, celtix?
[12:52] <cr22rc> I'm not advocating that right now..
[12:52] <ant_> think you should bring it up on the mailing list
[12:52] <rfeng> cr22rc, why don't we control them in the
"dependencyManagement" section at top levels?
[12:52] <cr22rc> rfeng: that was my proposal
[12:52] <rfeng> +1
[12:52] <cr22rc> before you joined.
[12:52] <rfeng> sorry
[12:53] <cr22rc> but ant was not too sure of that
[12:53] <Venkat> but how many dependencies can we put there...
[12:53] <Venkat> what is the rational we must follow for putting one
there as against somewhere further down
[12:53] <cr22rc> I like them all... as long as this is a single deliverable
[12:54] <cr22rc> I can look at the top level and know what all depends on.
[12:54] <ant_> guess i'm fine if its consistant. but its this some there
some not i think is confusing
[12:55] <cr22rc> right ... I vote all listed there or all moved down...
unless someone has a better rationale
[12:56] <ant_> is it a bit late for a change like that in M2?
[12:57] <cr22rc> well. that's the only reason I backed of to using the
same property at the least. you never stated if you didn't like that
[12:58] <cr22rc> rfeng: http://wiki.apache.org/ws/What's_new_for_SCA_Java_M2
[12:59] <Venkat> ok... its getting a bit late for me... can I catch up
on this on the ML IRC Log ?
[12:59] <rfeng> cr22rc, how many places are referencing axis2 versions
directly?
[12:59] <ant_> i need to go. fyi, i wont be around so much out of hours
for a couple of days as someone dug through the phone lines in my street
and they wont be fixed till wednesday
[13:00] <Venkat> oh .. that happens there too :)
[13:00] <ant_> :)
[13:00] <cr22rc> That just happened here... some cut through fiber!
[13:00] * ant_ is now known as ant_away
[13:00] <rfeng> my laptop is crashing
[13:01] <rfeng> I have to punch it to get the screen back :-(
[13:01] <Venkat> ok... I am signing off... will catch up on the ML..
.thanks everybody..
[13:01] <rfeng> cr22rc, your list looks good
[13:01] * Venkat has quit IRC
[13:01] <cr22rc> ok .. so I propose for m2 we just switch the property
right now for axis2
[13:02] <cr22rc> Ok fill in any details
[13:02] <rfeng> sure
[13:02] <rfeng> for the axis2 dependencies, maybe we should go the
mailing list
[13:03] <cr22rc> ok I'll propose the property change for now and see
where it takes us
[13:03] <rfeng> I prefer to fix it by using dependencyManagement, I
assumed we already have that in sca/pom.xml
[13:04] <cr22rc> yes ultimately but I'm thinking ant has one point...
it's getting late for m2
[13:04] <rfeng> do other modules now use axis2Version property?
[13:04] <rfeng> or the version directly?
[13:05] <cr22rc> I think the only confusion is between sca and tools
[13:05] <rfeng> if it's the later case, I don't see a difference on how
disruptive for both approaches
[13:05] <rfeng> ok
[13:06] <rfeng> Is there anything else I can help?
[13:06] <ant_away> isn't venkat looking at this now anyway?
[13:06] <cr22rc> I think I'm going to make an executive decison to bring
them in sync by just using the properties instead of hardcoding SNAPSHOT
and on the ML we can debate on moving everyting to pom.xml
[13:07] <cr22rc> should say SCA's top level pom.xml
[13:07] <ant_away> remember tools wont work till venkat fixes it to work
with the latest axis2
[13:07] <cr22rc> I have an un related question regarding axis
[13:07] <cr22rc> ok
[13:08] <cr22rc> I notice in the 1_1 branch etc/project.properties still
has a lot of things listed with SNAPSHOT ... I didn't think that is
allowed for a RC
[13:09] <ant_away> for a final. they say they going to change it
[13:09] <ant_away> not sure if that means another RC or not
[13:09] <cr22rc> ok.. odd why not settle on it now
[13:09] <cr22rc> ok not our concern... as long as they do do it.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
