Please see below complete summary of the IRC chat we had on 4,5,6th Feb. The
next one is as specified in previous response.

There was an IRC chat where me and Kelvin participated on Feb 4th, 5th and
6th , 2008
for SDO Java 1.1-incubating release. Below is the summary.

1) license files under distribution and sdo-api need to be
reviewed/corrected
as well as copyright text fro sources/resources under sdo-api need to be
reviewed/corrected based on latest from OSOA and based on when the
source/resource
files are changed.

2) SDO Java will follow the same strategy of providing LICENSE files under
src\main\resources\META-INF as before

3) http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/TUSCANYWIKI/SDO+Java+Project
is the place to find all unresolved JIRAs list marked for Java-SDO-next,
Please see columns"Category" and "Comment" for summary of what was discussed
in IRC.

4) Went through the list one by one and covered all JIRAs as below- ## are
the ones which are important, need to discuss in detail on IRC and ML
and see if can go in this release.
**********************************************
must have:-
1]1293 - important, patch is available, need to review and apply the patch,
if somebody with OSGI expertise can pitch in, will be very helpful
2]1063 - useful - Kelvin
**********************************************
nice to have:-
3]1862-workaround available in 1842 and no user issues on it so far
4]1838-Amita will check the existing solution against the last comment from
Ron in ASF JIRA comments - *Note* Please check Amita's comment in JIRA and
respond.
*Kelvin's comment* If this facility for java serialization requires use of
the SDOObjectOutputStream, document it in javadoc/website.
##5]1021 - + point is it's an omission from the spec, but it needs
considerable work, important one - check in Friday IRC
6]257 - Paul have suggestions, partial fix. Amita need to check it and try
to get it in the release.
Resolved------->7]1514 - Amita - ML[das] and reassign comp to sdo-impl ->
Kelvin will do it - give test case and track which revision(564600) did the
change
8]1688 - Kelvin checking with Ron, check EMF fixes and see subclassing
9]1689 - similar to 1688 , Ron's comments on 1688, 1689 will be helpful
10]1835 - ML to Fuhwei - ask more details,what constraints apply, what
investigation led to conclusion about "appinfo" - record these details in
JIRA
11]1868 - patch available, test case available - Kelvin will look at it

12]1659 - linux surefire logs available, can check from that, in Kelvin's
debian env could not reproduce the problem. if issue is not revealed by logs
alone,
then time required to recreate will be large.

13]1831 - Amita will check, looks useful, can have caveats in that once
you've made something pluggable they might diverge
and therefore a 3rd party version might rely on implementation details that
are subject to change
or they might miss out on fixes that we apply to the Tuscany version. If we
made that clear that it was the users repsonsibility to
take vcaar of these issues, then it sounds like a good commmunity type thing
to do

##14]761 - check during next IRC-Kevin - put comment in jira if it is still
a requirement-Amita
what is the memory cost of having to init number of HelperContexts?
Each one has at constrcution an instance of all HElpers that require to
manage their own state -- i.e. not CopyHelper or
EqualityHelper,  but all the others . The state of each of these helpers is
not large until you start registering types
so i think there would only be significant cost if there were  duplication
in storage of metadata across typehelpers
so the problem with multiple HelperContexts would be when loading XML

15]1182 - get tech findings from kelvin , see if anybody pops up, license
side is clean, there are other examples of use of this in apache

##16]1361 - check on next IRC - *Kelvin* , check in IRC, easy, significant
user impact

17]1360 -
http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/msg26306.html make
comment in JIRA about both approached and apply 1360-Amita.patch.
This was all the business where EMF has an issue that it cant handle the
empty string as a valid enumeration. Make that comment in JIRA and then
apply the 1360-Amita.patch. Wait for one day for Kelvin's response on ML ,
i.e. till 7th Feb.
**********************************************
next release:-
18]1725-the scope is big and better justice can be given in next release,
test schema is provided but no test code, javajet experience is useful here
19]1479 - Frank has suggested a workaround. And final solution can be
supporting "large model" pattern similar to EMF
20]1180 - nothing done on spec, the workaround is not to use r/o properties
21]203 - minor JIRA with workaround and no watchers
##22]1002 - kelvin want to check on it in next irc, ideally should be
resolved. so if time permits try to get it in this release.
23]1129
24]477- defering to see first the spec discussion, also there will be
performance hit
25]1433 - there will be performance hit
26]182 - check with Sebasitien and Frank on ML and mark their responses in
JIRA comment - Kelvin
27]1817 - too big
##28]1038***- talk in next IRC - is imp and major, axis2 databinding
29]152 - good new feature

30]1192 - depends on 2.1.1 spec - more detailed comments -
what it   requires is a specific list implementation ,so all demand created
open content properties are
created is-many = true, if you do a getList() on a property using string
"foo" then a Property is created,
and it must be referenced by the list, that measn that if the list contents
is one,  then getInstanceProperties
on the DataObject retursn the Property with name "foo". If the list is
emptied, then getInstanceProperties does
not retuen the prop with name foo, and then if the same list has a new value
added to it,  then we still have hold
of the original Property,  by virtue of the reference held in the list. so
we woulld get == as true for the Property
instance returned before and after the emptying of the list

Is this already this way in Tuscany ? - not sure, need to check

This is a clarification that will be in the 2.1.1 spec,  but it  wouldn't
hurt if it worked that way in our impl
Kelvin will take a look

What is - alter behaviour such that the demand created property is available
in the applications metadata after the load operation. ?
What will change after load operation?
There's a different emphasis there, there may be a mixture of two issues
here
We should wait until the 2.1.1 discussions have completed before we address
this

31]1493 - ongoing discussion with Agfa to discuss how we might absorb some
of the ways they address SDO issues

32]1685 - useful new addition
33]551 -  useful new addition

"mostly" won't fix - need a confirmation on ML
34]67 - there has some work done in this area and JIRA is not clear on the
particular issue. HelperContext came up after this issue. Some
work done on DefaultHelperContext to work with thread local context. So,
discuss and make appropriate comment in JIRA so the 2 watchers will
get notification if the JIRA is closed as won't fix.

35]69 - first announce as summary on ML planning to close 67., 69 and then
if noone objects, do it
this is the only remaining subtask of 67,  that we decided we would close
IIRC,  and see if anyone reopens it
Please responde if there is some objection to close 67 and 69

36]832->dont close, defer, outside the SDO spec, at serialization the graph
should be closed,and refs outside the closure of graph are broken,
EMF doesnt have this restriction, and maybe in the future SDO won't, Fuhwei
as acknowleged the fact that this is outside the spec,  and is
asking for SPIs

37]1327 - Ask Fuhwei if this is for xsd2java or wsdl2java and mark change in
comp/release, at present is marked Fix Version - SCA release
38]1918 - make comment, dont change anything else, has dependency on spec

39]1932 - mark as sdo next and is nice to have - its not too difficult to
do,  and has some synergy
  with the issue of enumeration facets we discussed earlier , lets see if
anyone wants it on Friday

40]2014 - possible nice to have - kelvin will put a comment, David is
looking at it.
**********************************************
Appreciate all help in getting all important JIRAs in this release

5) After Friday's IRC - based on the final discussion - will mark in ASF
JIRA, the "must have" JIRAs for Java-SDO-1.1, till
then all  discussed are marked for Fix Version "Java-SDO-Next". Also
appropriate comments will be appended to JIRAs

6) Did not discuss any CTS JIRAs are these won't be part of the release.

Kelvin, will you please see if by mistake I have missed any details?

Regards,
Amita

On Feb 6, 2008 5:07 PM, kelvin goodson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Lets confirm this at the suggested time.
>
> Kelvin.
>
> On 05/02/2008, Jeff Davis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > The 9AM slot works for me, and I will try to attend.
> >
> > jeff
> >
> > On Mon, 2008-02-04 at 17:45 +0000, kelvin goodson wrote:
> > > This is a follow-up invitation for you to influence the current SDO
> Java
> > > release content that Amita is managing.  We tried having an IRC slot
> in
> > > Amita's "working" day (actually starting at 9:30PM her time; summary
> > posted
> > > at [1]),  but didn't get participation,  which may have been due to
> the
> > > early start from a US West Coast perspective, so I will host another
> > session
> > > on Friday afternoon UK time, precise time to be confirmed,  but I
> would
> > > suggest 5PM GMT / 9AM PST.  Please post if you plan to attend,  or
> would
> > > attend if the time were different.
> > >
> > > I'm cross posting to tuscany-user and tuscany-dev here,  but please
> > respond
> > > to tuscany-user only, as I assume all who are subscribed to
> tuscany-dev
> > are
> > > also subscribed to tuscany-user.
> > >
> > > We will use the usual Tuscany IRC channel  on server irc.freenode.net,
> > > channel #Tuscany
> > >
> > > Kelvin.
> > >
> > > [1]
> > >
> >
> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/ws-tuscany-user/200802.mbox/browser
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> >
>

Reply via email to