The wiki is down. I will publish the minutes of the first call here.
You will find a copy of these notes at the wiki when it is back.
*
---
Minutes of the JEE 5 Working Group meeting
**
Date: *
11/30/2006 / 11 AM EST
*Attendees:
*
Bob Frost
Shaun Smith
Tim Wagner
David Williams
Larry Isaacs
Chuck Bridgham
Paul Andersen
Neil Hauge
Karen Moore
Dave Gordon
John Goodman
Brian Vosburgh
Kaloyan Raev
Max Andersen
and more....
*Summary Transcript:
*
* ND: Welcome to the first call of the JEE working group. We will
repeat this call weekly to track progress of the implementation.
Working group is composed of the component owner who will lead the
implementation. Today we have a wider audience.
* ND: We will start with a review of the discussion summarized in
http://wiki.eclipse.org/index.php/JEE_5_Support. To start with
lets review what is planned in WTP 2.0 for JEE 5 support. David
can you comment on JSP/JSTL support?
* DW: There will be some JSP support for JEE5 for WTP 2.0. Dteail
sare not clear but there is some work
* ND: How about JSTL? I know Raghu was interested in this for JSF.
* No answers .... Raghu not online
* ND: Neil, Can you comment on JPA and EJB3 status?
* NH: Dali projects covers the JPA spec. The rest of EJB 3 is not in
its scope. There is some work thatcan be used for EJB3 like our
way of handling metadata but we do not support session beans.
* CB: Neil, I know that you have built utilities to handle two
different sources for info: Annotations (metadata) and XML
descriptors for the model. We are also interested in supporting
both sources in JEE 5 models. I think a common layer can be
extracted from Dali and contributed to JST. What are your
recommendations?
* NH: I can say(hope) that a common model can be defined for both
sources. What we found is things are very different for these
sources. Especially, the behavioral content is very different
(descriptors are quite different). They are not very clean. That
has caused a lot complexity. Annotation do not support everything
in the descriptors + model have to act differently for defaulting
- i.e. defaults specs vs java model.
* PA: For example containment behavior is different. In XML you
start with a mapping, and in the mapping you spec a class. In
java you start with class and do the mapping.
* BV: Another problem is that both models (XML and Annotations) are
too flat for tooling purposes.
* CB: We should start talking about solutions to these problems.
Thanks to SAP for their contributions. The SAP proposal made us
look at how to extend the models. We have to be forward thinking
about how to extend the models for future version i.e JEE6. JEE5
is so different that we need to separate it cleanly from the
existing models. We need interfaces between Java and XML models.
That way we may not need to change the models, which is very
important for backward compatibility. We can add interfaces as
needed.
* MA: Is any of this will be in WTP2.0? WTP 1.5.2 is not EJB3
friendly. We need a release of WTP 1.5 that does not complain
about EJB3 for JBoss IDE.
* DW: I do not want to sound pessimistic. But we will see what can
do. But not sure we will be able to do it in 1.5.3.
* CB: I do not think it is a good idea to change the existing
models. J2EE is currently hard coded in the models. The models do
not not recognize the JEE 5 versions and namespaces. We can
create a patch so that the namespace can be handles, all legacy
models will be included but anything new will not be recognized.
Any work beyond that will be in 2.0
* CB: What are your thoughts on having model interfaces does not
have dependencies on EMF. We can have a anpother set that has the
old style interfaces with EMF dependencies.
* DW: I support that. Reducing the coupling is better
* CB: EMF provides things like notifications etc. We can provide
overlapping/alternate interfaces
* PA: EMF very slanted towards XML, not natural to use in Java
sometimes
* CB: Neil, you also have done work to extend AST in JDT with
annotation utils. Any plans to push that into a common layer.
* BV: No plans
* CB: We are very interested in having that contributed to a common
layer too. That work is very useful for all kinds of other things.
* BV: JDT has very little. That work allows us to manipulate
annotations, ignorant of types of annotations, it provides all the
sugar on annotations.
* DW: These looks like good places to start. I suggest we find
things like that and open a patch to move them to a common layer.
And iteratively see if this can be done.
* SS: There is a lot of support in Dali for editing and validating
annotations. I can build EJB3 sessions. Of course, WTP does not
recognize them as EJBs. To start with we probably do not need any
EJB3 editing tools and wizards. I need validation deployment
support. The simple case is just to package them and deploy
them. Do not worry about descriptors.
* CB: I would like to propose tro extend the existing model to
handle XML, recognize the new name space (use the old elements),
then start contributing the new plugins as an extended plugins.
In phase 2 we can start looking at the annotation model. I am not
sure when thi scan start (if at all for WTP 2.0). When we add the
support for the namespaces, we can tolerate the EJB3 descriptors.
Extended tools would work. I cannot commit to it now. We will
start with enabling the JEE 5 models. This work will probably go
on after Jan7 (two miletsones left) M5 is before eclipsecon.
* DW: Ideally we should be done 80% done for M5, M6 should be done
and ready to start the end game.
* CB: What are peoples thoughts on making these changes - old
models and new namespace?
* DW: I would caution against that changes: 1) Any temporary
changes will become permanent. 2) If not needed for WTP I am
against it. But we can provide patches. We should do this
incrementally. There are too many unknowns.
* BV: You cannot do much with XML without knowing about annotations,
so these are temporary changes
* MA: Pure EJB project, you do not need too many descriptors. It is
easier. Now, WTP 1.5 tooling says you have to be complex. To
start with we should think what is the minimal for support for EJB3.
* ND: We can probably support EJB3 facets, other specific JEE 5
facets and simple projects. If you have done it for JBoss IDE,
rre you interested in contributing that?
* MA: We could, they are quite simple.
* SS: A word of caution.. Even with simple projects, we must support
the old style descriptors so it will not be that easy.
* MA: Maybe we should start with simple case.
* SS: That is what we start in Dali, we will add complexity later.
That is the common use case. Transactions semantics and defaulting
is very similar to DALI
* CB: Enablement you are speaking of does not require XML. That is
what we are trying to get away from
* MA: JBoss IDE EJB3 support is a facet, if we can handle that we
will be done. There are some deployment limitations and specific
problems, I will send to Chuck. Hard coded things and stuff make
it hard.
* CB: This will be good, because this will get us started with an
easier use-case that we can work it.
* DW: We should talk about this focus group. It should be limited
to people who are working on the code and should be focused on
JEE5 support task.
* ND: Agreed.
* CB: We should use the wiki to start adding comments and minutes.
By next we should start talking about a plan and what to do for
the milestones.
* DW: Focus group should be working on the code. For others we can
update status and plans.
* ND: Thanks for attending. The notes will be available at the
wiki. We will meet next week.
--
Naci Dai,
eteration a.s.
itu teknokent ari-1 25
Maslak, Istanbul 34469
+90 (533) 580 2393 (cell)
+90 (212) 328 0825 (phone)
+90 (212) 328 0521 (fax)
http://www.eteration.com/
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
_______________________________________________
wtp-dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/wtp-dev
