balunasj
:
lets get started
[
10:05am
]
balunasj
:
First I wanted to talk about the latest updates to the build system
[
10:05am
]
balunasj
:
Anton worked on these and I think they are looking good.
[
10:05am
]
balunasj
:
I posted a few comments and questions back to him about it.
[
10:06am
]
balunasj
:
Once those are set I think we should move to svn root
[
10:06am
]
balunasj
:
abelevich: when do you think you will be able to finish up those changes
[
10:07am
]
abelevich
:
I think today evening or tomorrow
[
10:07am
]
balunasj
:
abelevich: tomorrow is a holiday so Monday then - right?
[
10:08am
]
abelevich
:
I'm going to work tomorrow
[
10:09am
]
balunasj
:
abelevich: you crazy man
[
10:09am
]
balunasj
:
abelevich: let me know when it is done updated and I'll review again
[
10:09am
]
abelevich
:
îê incompatible encoding
[
10:10am
]
balunasj
:
abelevich: the last comment did not come through - "incompatible encoding"
[
10:10am
]
balunasj
:
On Monday lets move rf4_build to svn root.
[
10:10am
]
abelevich
:
sorry ... ok
[
10:10am
]
balunasj
:
nbelaevski: abelevich thoughts?
[
10:11am
]
balunasj
:
its time to take it out of the sandbox
[
10:11am
]
nbelaevski
:
balunasj: I'm ok with that
[
10:12am
]
abelevich
:
I'm ok with that too
[
10:12am
]
balunasj
:
ok good - once it is in svn root we can migrate JSF2.0 branch to it.
[
10:13am
]
balunasj
:
One thing I did want to discuss about the build system is
[
10:13am
]
balunasj
:
using <framework.version>${project.version}</framework.version> in the version-matrix
[
10:14am
]
balunasj
:
abelevich: not sure if you commented on this in the email, and even so might be worth talking about here
[
10:14am
]
balunasj
:
right now we are setting ^^ in the version matrix
[
10:14am
]
abelevich
:
i didn't comment this
[
10:15am
]
abelevich
:
in the e-mail
[
10:15am
]
balunasj
:
np
[
10:16am
]
balunasj
:
then the parent pom (framework) is using this to set the version of the library
[
10:16am
]
balunasj
:
I think can get into the circular dependency problem we discussed in the f-2-f
[
10:16am
]
balunasj
:
especially if other dependent modules use it as well.
[
10:18am
]
balunasj
:
Does anyone know where this is used? or if it is used by other modules?
[
10:18am
]
•
balunasj
 
starting eclipse now
[
10:19am
]
nbelaevski
:
it's been there to define components dependencies
[
10:19am
]
clerum joined the chat room.
[
10:20am
]
balunasj
:
nbelaevski: is it legacy then?
[
10:20am
]
balunasj
:
take for example ui/version-matrix/pom.xml
[
10:21am
]
balunasj
:
it is pulling the same version # for ui, framework, and cdk version #
[
10:21am
]
balunasj
:
these may be slightly different
[
10:21am
]
balunasj
:
fisheye is having issue right now so I can't provide a link
[
10:21am
]
nbelaevski
:
it should be removed from framework/* part
[
10:22am
]
nbelaevski
:
for UI I think it's ok
[
10:22am
]
balunasj
:
<ui.version>${project.version}</ui.version>
[
10:22am
]
balunasj
:
    <framework.version>${project.version}</framework.version>
[
10:22am
]
balunasj
:
    <cdk.version>${project.version}</cdk.version>
[
10:23am
]
balunasj
:
So the problem I have is setting these in the version matrix if these are set in the ui/pom.xml I am ok (assuming you are not using the project.version for value)
[
10:24am
]
balunasj
:
It just so happens to be the same now, but might be slightly different and I think by not setting these specifically you make it clear.
[
10:25am
]
nbelaevski
:
for me it's just a convinient shortcut for the concrete api/test versions, so I'd suggest to leave it in version-matrix
[
10:25am
]
balunasj
:
nbelaevski: can you explain that a little bit more?
[
10:26am
]
nbelaevski
:
here is the cut from dependency-management:
[
10:26am
]
nbelaevski
:
      <dependency>
[
10:26am
]
nbelaevski
:
        <groupId>org.richfaces.framework</groupId>
[
10:26am
]
nbelaevski
:
        <artifactId>richfaces-api</artifactId>
[
10:26am
]
nbelaevski
:
        <version>${framework.version}</version>
[
10:26am
]
nbelaevski
:
      </dependency>
[
10:26am
]
nbelaevski
:
      <dependency>
[
10:26am
]
nbelaevski
:
        <groupId>org.richfaces.framework</groupId>
[
10:26am
]
nbelaevski
:
        <artifactId>richfaces-test-base</artifactId>
[
10:26am
]
nbelaevski
:
        <version>${framework.version}</version>
[
10:26am
]
nbelaevski
:
        <scope>test</scope>
[
10:26am
]
nbelaevski
:
        <scope>test</scope>
[
10:27am
]
nbelaevski
:
we could set it to be 4.0.0-snapshot, however we would have to change this in two place in the future (e.g when tagging release). now we have a single place - framework.version variable
[
10:28am
]
nbelaevski
:
abelevich: have you checked if inheriting projects are able to redefine this?
[
10:28am
]
balunasj
:
nbelaevski: What I don't like is setting the version with <framework.version>${project.version}</framework.version>
[
10:29am
]
balunasj
:
It assumes they are always the same
[
10:29am
]
abelevich
:
nbelaevski: no I didn't do this
[
10:30am
]
nbelaevski
:
yes, ${project.version} is ok to replace with particular version number. and it's ok to leave <framework.version>4.0.0-snapshot</framework.version> in version-matrix, right?
[
10:30am
]
nbelaevski
:
abelevich: can you please check this quickly?
[
10:31am
]
balunasj
:
Now that ui has it's own version-matrix I think it is ok because  the dependency to framework is external to it.
[
10:31am
]
balunasj
:
It is like depending on any other third party library.
[
10:31am
]
abelevich
:
nbelaevski: sure
[
10:31am
]
nbelaevski
:
completely agree
[
10:32am
]
balunasj
:
nbelaevski: cool
[
10:34am
]
balunasj
:
while abelevich is looking into the other thing lets talk about migrating jsf2.0 branch to svn root once we move rf4_build to it
[
10:34am
]
alexsmirnov
:
The problem is that ${project.version} variable resolved in the current pom.xml, therefore if ui version changed it will affect versions of all other modules also. ui version 4.0.1 will look for framework 4.0.1 too.
[
10:34am
]
balunasj
:
alexsmirnov: exactly my concern
[
10:35am
]
alexsmirnov
:
it breaks independent versions management.
[
10:35am
]
balunasj
:
alexsmirnov: we are going to change the properties to explicit values for these
[
10:35am
]
nbelaevski
:
alexsmirnov: balunasj: ok, gentlemen, Anton will fix it
[
10:36am
]
balunasj
:
alexsmirnov: nbelaevski : what kind of time frame is needed to migrate jsf2.0 to svn root?
[
10:36am
]
balunasj
:
once new build system migrated to it Monday.
[
10:37am
]
nbelaevski
:
just the time to copy it in SVN
[
10:37am
]
balunasj
:
nbelaevski: won't there be some about of integration and break up into the new build system?
[
10:40am
]
nbelaevski
:
it's already separated to modules. the only thing to do is adding new test applucation ro run the framework. I haven't found one, so created myself
[
10:41am
]
balunasj
:
but it is not one for one copy - that is why I was asking about timeframe 1 day, 2 days ?
[
10:41am
]
balunasj
:
also what is the new new test application?  can you explain or point to it in svn for me?
[
10:42am
]
balunasj
:
also the versions and poms will need to updated to remove versions for the move.
[
10:42am
]
nbelaevski
:
just a simple JSF 2.0 developer demo to test framework features - e.g. dynamic resources
[
10:43am
]
balunasj
:
nbelaevski: repeater example?
[
10:44am
]
nbelaevski
:
balunasj: yes, I can move resources code there - it's several lines of code in xhtml
[
10:44am
]
nbelaevski
:
test code, of course
[
10:44am
]
nbelaevski
:
well, I think maximum one day timeframe
[
10:45am
]
balunasj
:
nbelaevski: no what I mean is the test application the repeater example?
[
10:45am
]
balunasj
:
nbelaevski: it sounds like this is a different test app
[
10:45am
]
balunasj
:
though, so yes having it be an example or component/example makes sense.
[
10:46am
]
nbelaevski
:
balunasj: no, I didn't use repeater, but created new JSF application using JBDS and test on it
[
10:46am
]
balunasj
:
nbelaevski: ok ic
[
10:46am
]
nbelaevski
:
it's local and haven't been checked in - the only functionality is skin switcher, so that I see real dynamics in resources
[
10:46am
]
balunasj
:
alexsmirnov: do you have anything that you need to commit for the move to the new build system?
[
10:46am
]
balunasj
:
nbelaevski: np
[
10:47am
]
balunasj
:
It would likely be tuesday of next week
[
10:47am
]
balunasj
:
if everything goes smoothly.
[
10:47am
]
nbelaevski
:
balunasj: yes
[
10:49am
]
alexsmirnov
:
I committed all code into jsf-2.0 branch before the trip. The only jsf-test project and CDK contain new code. I can move these changes into trunk as new structure will be ready.
[
10:50am
]
balunasj
:
alexsmirnov: ok great
[
10:50am
]
balunasj
:
so it sounds like we have a plan for early next week with the svn move.
[
10:50am
]
balunasj
:
the timing should be good so that next Wednesday meeting we can discuss next steps for 4.0
[
10:51am
]
balunasj
:
and break up some of the feature development within the team
[
10:51am
]
balunasj
:
everyone agree?
[
10:52am
]
nbelaevski
:
ok
[
10:52am
]
alexsmirnov
:
It's ok. I did not check code during vacation ( only took a look for email discussion ) so I need a day to figure out current status.
[
10:52am
]
balunasj
:
alexsmirnov: no problem that should be fine time wise
[
10:53am
]
balunasj
:
nbelaevski: we won't have time to go over you resource changes, but I think that you should post that email that sent as a forum post on the design forums
[
10:53am
]
balunasj
:
it is good and once fisheye is back and working should be good for everyone to review.
[
10:54am
]
nbelaevski
:
fisheye is back already as I see
[
10:55am
]
balunasj
:
nbelaevski: when I click on a file to view raw, or annotated I get error
[
10:55am
]
balunasj
:
too many open files in svn
[
10:56am
]
balunasj
:
the just migrated the servers to a new data center and I think some tweaking is still needed
[
10:56am
]
nbelaevski
:
ok, I see
[
10:56am
]
balunasj
:
yeah
[
10:56am
]
balunasj
:
so when you get a chance post that email to the forums I think it is important to show progress and get opinions
[
10:57am
]
nbelaevski
:
good, I'll post it right now
[
10:57am
]
balunasj
:
That does it for my list - does anyone else have anything to bring up?
[
10:57am
]
balunasj
:
for 4.0
[
10:58am
]
nbelaevski
:
nothing from my side
[
10:59am
]
balunasj
:
ok guys thanks for coming and we'll talk later - if I don't see you have a good long week end and abelevich don't work all weekend
[
11:00am
]
abelevich
:
ok
[
11:00am
]
nbelaevski
:
balunasj: alexsmirnov: have fun on holiday
[
11:00am
]
balunasj
:
nbelaevski: you too
[
11:01am
]
nbelaevski
:
thanks