balunasj
:
ok lets get started - note the agenda is posted to pastebin in the channel topic
[
11:11am
]
balunasj
:
we'll just point there for now
[
11:12am
]
balunasj
:
So we are going to skip the community section - Ilya was going to give a tour of the new wiki, but he is out today.
[
11:12am
]
balunasj
:
nbelaevski: do you know if he has heard back from tim potter r. his example?
[
11:12am
]
balunasj
:
I can check back with him later if not
[
11:12am
]
nbelaevski
:
as far as I know, no, he didn't
[
11:13am
]
balunasj
:
ok thanks
[
11:13am
]
balunasj
:
So we'll just move on to 3.3.2.CR1
[
11:13am
]
balunasj
:
We met earlier this week and set some dates for the release
[
11:14am
]
balunasj
:
They are initial code freeze on July 31st
[
11:14am
]
balunasj
:
build to QE August 24th
[
11:14am
]
balunasj
:
sorry
[
11:14am
]
balunasj
:
build to QE August 3rd
[
11:14am
]
balunasj
:
weekly build for QE
[
11:14am
]
balunasj
:
and release on August 24th-25th
[
11:15am
]
alexsmirnov joined the chat room.
[
11:15am
]
balunasj
:
We'll begin reviewing jira's at next weeks meeting for that release
[
11:15am
]
balunasj
:
alexsmirnov: Hi Alex
[
11:16am
]
alexsmirnov
:
Hi! I'm late due to traffic.
[
11:16am
]
balunasj
:
alexsmirnov: np we started late
[
11:16am
]
balunasj
:
just going over the dates for 3.3.2.CR1 plan
[
11:16am
]
balunasj
:
check the agenda in the channel topic for them.
[
11:16am
]
balunasj
:
alexsmirnov: ^
[
11:17am
]
balunasj
:
nbelaevski: what are your thoughts on the 3.3.2.CR1 dev team activities during the testing cycle?
[
11:19am
]
nbelaevski
:
regression issues fixing and RF 4.0 activities. also we can think about writing more Selenium tests
[
11:20am
]
balunasj
:
nbelaevski: I agree with the regression issue fixing & fixing issues found by QE.  We can discuss the 4.0 activities that would be good for that time too.
[
11:20am
]
balunasj
:
It might also be good to have one of the dev team review in details the selenium tests with prabhat1
[
11:20am
]
amitev left the chat room. (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer))
[
11:20am
]
nbelaevski
:
this 4.0 task can be components code review and transfer
[
11:21am
]
balunasj
:
That could be a good use of time while QE is testing
[
11:21am
]
nbelaevski
:
sure, we can put someone for review if necessary
[
11:21am
]
prabhat1
:
nbelaevski: which selenium tests are you talking about? Adding new for photo album?
[
11:21am
]
balunasj
:
nbelaevski: That leads to a question I think we need to discuss in the 4.0 meeting - what is going to be our 4.0 Alpha
[
11:21am
]
nbelaevski
:
prabhat1: no, for uncovered components/features
[
11:22am
]
nbelaevski
:
balunasj: you mean the list of components included there?
[
11:22am
]
balunasj
:
nbelaevski: yup - we can save that talk for Thursday's meeting as it may take a while
[
11:23am
]
nbelaevski
:
balunasj: ok
[
11:23am
]
prabhat1
:
nbelaevski: ya, let's talk about that on Thursday.
[
11:24am
]
balunasj
:
prabhat1: I was talking about the 4.0 alpha plan
[
11:24am
]
balunasj
:
prabhat1: I think talking about the selenium work for 3.3.2.CR1 is good for here
[
11:25am
]
balunasj
:
I'll need to figure out time usage when QE is working on 3.3.2.CR1
[
11:25am
]
prabhat1
:
ok
[
11:26am
]
balunasj
:
I mean we'll need to
[
11:26am
]
balunasj
:
sorry about that - figuring out the time usage and plan for that time will be all of us
[
11:27am
]
balunasj
:
nbelaevski: so next week we should have the other 3.3.2.CR1 dev team guys join the meeting
[
11:28am
]
balunasj
:
nbelaevski: I'll make sure the whole dev team is on the invite.
[
11:28am
]
nbelaevski
:
balunasj: ok
[
11:28am
]
prabhat1
:
nbelaevski: Do you know if Alex K was able to look into two failing tests in Hudson for photo album?
[
11:29am
]
balunasj
:
nbelaevski: I'm also thinking that since we will have a shorter time window for the 3.3.2.CR1 release testing the dev team may need to be more engaged with it
[
11:29am
]
balunasj
:
to provide rapid feedback, patches, etc...
[
11:30am
]
nbelaevski
:
prabhat1: yes, he has looked and said that component is broken, that's why tests are failing
[
11:30am
]
prabhat1
:
nbelaevski: that's good. I was not able to figure out anything wrong in test case but I thought may be it's something that I do not understand
[
11:31am
]
prabhat1
:
nbelaevski: Looks like Hudson did its job
[
11:32am
]
nbelaevski
:
balunasj: do you mean to engage more people?
[
11:33am
]
balunasj
:
nbelaevski: I mean that the 3.3.2 dev team may need to spend more time with QE team because of the short release cycle.  Answering questions, patches, fixes, etc....
[
11:34am
]
nbelaevski
:
balunasj: interacting with QE is the primary responsibility during release testing
[
11:34am
]
balunasj
:
nbelaevski: I know they do most of that already during a release cycle, but might need for time for it so we may not be able to have them doing too much else ( 4.0, selenium tests, etc...)
[
11:35am
]
balunasj
:
nbelaevski: I think we are on the same page with this.
[
11:35am
]
nbelaevski
:
balunasj: that's true. selenium tests/rf 4.0 are their low priority jobs. release is the main one
[
11:35am
]
balunasj
:
yup
[
11:36am
]
balunasj
:
So next week we will begin reviewing jira in more detail - we should attempt to do personal review between now and then.
[
11:36am
]
balunasj
:
We'll also discuss more about docs and QE plans for the release
[
11:37am
]
balunasj
:
We can also begin to break down release cycle activities if possible, and if Ilya is available he can walk us through the wiki changes.
[
11:37am
]
•
balunasj
 
hey - that sounds like the agenda for next week
[
11:37am
]
balunasj
:
anyone have anything else for 3.3.2.CR1 release?
[
11:40am
]
balunasj
:
ok so lets move on the the RFPL project
[
11:40am
]
balunasj
:
https://jira.jboss.org/jira/browse/RFPL
[
11:41am
]
balunasj
:
Here is the link and it is a clean pallete - we can start using it any time, but I think that discussing the usage policy would be good.
[
11:41am
]
balunasj
:
as I said in the agenda I would like this to be an interactive talk - not just me typing
[
11:41am
]
balunasj
:
The results of this I'll write up into a wiki page with jira usage policy
[
11:42am
]
balunasj
:
So lets discuss what going in RF vs. RFPL
[
11:42am
]
balunasj
:
RF = Jira's should be directly traceable to an actual changes to the RichFaces code base
[
11:42am
]
balunasj
:
RF = Actual bugs, features request, and changes to the code base
[
11:43am
]
balunasj
:
RF = High level tasks like "Develop a photo-album demo application"
[
11:43am
]
balunasj
:
RFPL = Plans to do something
[
11:44am
]
balunasj
:
RFPL = If a task like the photo album demo needs to be broken down into minor tasks
[
11:44am
]
alexsmirnov
:
The my only opinion, do not create too fine grained tasks. Although it is simple to close them step by stem, hundreds of issues discourage and hard to search.
[
11:45am
]
balunasj
:
------- Then a jira should be created in planning, linked to the one in RF where these details can be set.
[
11:45am
]
balunasj
:
alexsmirnov: Agree
[
11:45am
]
balunasj
:
alexsmirnov: I think part of the reason we needed the RFPL project was because these fine grain tasks.
[
11:46am
]
balunasj
:
other thoughts, ideas?
[
11:47am
]
balunasj
:
abogachuk: I know docs has some planning type jiras - what are your thoughts on this?
[
11:48am
]
balunasj
:
abogachuk: were you able to discuss with svetlana on this or have your own opinions?
[
11:48am
]
alexsmirnov
:
I'm not sure, does it make sense to create planning tasks in the two projects ? I thing we should move all planning tasks to RFPL and left RF for bugs and feature requests only.
[
11:49am
]
balunasj
:
alexsmirnov: I agree - I think we may have miscommunicated somehow did I say something different?
[
11:50am
]
alexsmirnov
:
I meant about 'RF = High level tasks like "Develop a photo-album demo application"'
[
11:50am
]
abogachuk
:
balunasj, I'm not informed on that I'm afraid
[
11:51am
]
balunasj
:
alexsmirnov: ah - I see - that is a fine item to have for RF because in the change log for RF having a single entry for "Create a XXXXX example" is fine
[
11:51am
]
balunasj
:
having 80 jiras all related to that one is not
[
11:52am
]
balunasj
:
In other words that is a valid high level task or feature request
[
11:52am
]
balunasj
:
Docs does this quite a bit as well - jiras that cover very specific changes instead of high level items
[
11:52am
]
balunasj
:
abogachuk: ok np
[
11:53am
]
balunasj
:
alexsmirnov: does that make sense?
[
11:54am
]
balunasj
:
regarding the change log and high/low level items?
[
11:54am
]
balunasj
:
nbelaevski: prabhat1 : how about you guys any opinions on this?
[
11:55am
]
nbelaevski
:
balunasj: me - ok
[
11:55am
]
balunasj
:
nbelaevski: ok
[
11:55am
]
prabhat1
:
balunasj: alexsmirnov nbelaevski: if there are more than 50 jira per release
[
11:55am
]
prabhat1
:
then either we are working a lot or we are creating jira for every little thing we do
[
11:55am
]
prabhat1
:
it's not right in both cases
[
11:56am
]
nbelaevski
:
prabhat1: i cannot agree with that
[
11:56am
]
prabhat1
:
hehe
[
11:56am
]
balunasj
:
prabhat1: 50 might be a little low
[
11:56am
]
alexsmirnov
:
balunasj: sure, especially if we are going to geterate changelog from JIRA
[
11:56am
]
balunasj
:
alexsmirnov: yup - if we need the detail we can have it in planning
[
11:56am
]
balunasj
:
take the last release 3.3.1.GA for example
[
11:57am
]
balunasj
:
1124 jira's "resolved"
[
11:57am
]
balunasj
:
119 docs
[
11:57am
]
balunasj
:
492 = planning
[
11:57am
]
prabhat1
:
balunasj: that's absurd
[
11:57am
]
balunasj
:
and that was a point release
[
11:57am
]
balunasj
:
prabhat1: but this is why we discussed the the RFPL project
[
11:58am
]
balunasj
:
nick, alex, and I + team discussed a place for these types of details in the f-2-f
[
11:58am
]
prabhat1
:
balunasj: even in RFPL, it should be that many jira
[
11:59am
]
balunasj
:
prabhat1: I'm fine with RFPL containing more granular details - but I agree in general we should be trimming our usage.
[
12:00pm
]
balunasj
:
nbelaevski: I wanted to get back to your comment.  I agree that 50 jira's is low - did you have more to add?
[
12:02pm
]
nbelaevski
:
balunasj: 1124 - (119 + 492) is larger than 50
[
12:03pm
]
nbelaevski
:
let me check how much bugs were fixed there
[
12:04pm
]
nbelaevski
:
109
[
12:04pm
]
prabhat1
:
brb
[
12:05pm
]
balunasj
:
nbelaevski: I just threw those #s out quick
[
12:05pm
]
balunasj
:
nbelaevski: I'm not saying there can't even be 100s of jira for a release - we have a large team
[
12:07pm
]
balunasj
:
nbelaevski: we just need to make sure what is in jira for a release represents digestible lists of changes that occurred in the release
[
12:07pm
]
balunasj
:
nbelaevski: at the appropriate level of detail
[
12:07pm
]
nbelaevski
:
balunasj: then what about bugs being fixed for new components? how to filter them?
[
12:07pm
]
balunasj
:
nbelaevski: what was the 109?
[
12:08pm
]
nbelaevski
:
that are bugs fixed for 3.3.1 with components other than "examples"
[
12:08pm
]
balunasj
:
ah ic
[
12:08pm
]
nbelaevski
:
in fact, if we filter this by "affects version", we'll get another picture
[
12:09pm
]
balunasj
:
nbelaevski: bugs are bugs - if we have fixed an issue it should be in jira.
[
12:09pm
]
nbelaevski
:
there's no point in saying "we've fixed 20 colorpicker issues"; the right phrase is "we've released new colorpicker component"
[
12:10pm
]
nbelaevski
:
of course, that's true for 3.3.1 releaes. that's what I'm taking about
[
12:10pm
]
balunasj
:
nbelaevski: I think that the 109 # is fine - so theoretically if this process was followed for 3.3.1. we would be looking at 125-150 jiras
[
12:10pm
]
balunasj
:
that is find
[
12:10pm
]
nbelaevski
:
some are for new components/features. are users interested in such?
[
12:11pm
]
nbelaevski
:
imo, only if they reported them
[
12:11pm
]
balunasj
:
nbelaevski: right - but I would also say that if there were 20 issues with the color picker that made it to QE then dev probably missed a fair ammount of issues in their own development
[
12:11pm
]
balunasj
:
nbelaevski: you mean bugs found while testing new components/features?
[
12:12pm
]
nbelaevski
:
balunasj: yes
[
12:12pm
]
balunasj
:
nbelaevski: the problem with that we can end of tracking actual jira's in too many places.  QE should be putting in bug they find into RF
[
12:12pm
]
balunasj
:
QE should put in their own planning tasks in RFPL too
[
12:14pm
]
balunasj
:
all: I've got to get going for another appointment soon
[
12:15pm
]
balunasj
:
good comments on this though - I think our use RFPL will evolve and I also think that nbelaevski alexsmirnov and I have similar thoughts on RFPL - I think we are breaking down the details - which is good
[
12:15pm
]
nbelaevski
:
balunasj: ok, i think we can write up some policy and then review it
[
12:15pm
]
nbelaevski
:
balunasj: if needed
[
12:15pm
]
balunasj
:
nbelaevski: yup I will do that today/tomorrow and email the group
[
12:16pm
]
balunasj
:
then we'll announce it out to everyone for opinions and comments
[
12:16pm
]
nbelaevski
:
balunasj: ok, i'll ask everybody in the team to put on suggestions/comments then
[
12:17pm
]
balunasj
:
I'll also write up the minutes and post the transcript as usual
[
12:17pm
]
balunasj
:
nbelaevski: if you could have them forward them to me that would be good
[
12:17pm
]
balunasj
:
The version I post should be close to the final I think
[
12:17pm
]
alexsmirnov
:
I'm trying to find convenient place for architecture design. I put all these articles to wiki now, is it make sense to use RFPL ?
[
12:17pm
]
nbelaevski
:
balunasj: wiki comments are ok?
[
12:19pm
]
balunasj
:
nbelaevski: that is fine too, just thinking that wiki comments can get hard to track if you then update the doc - but either way is fine
[
12:19pm
]
nbelaevski
:
balunasj: ok good
[
12:19pm
]
balunasj
:
alexsmirnov: yes I think RFPL could be a good place for some of that with points to the wiki for content.
[
12:20pm
]
balunasj
:
alexsmirnov: in other words you could use RFPL for what needs to be done and link from that to wiki articles where the bulk of the actual design is
[
12:22pm
]
balunasj
:
sorry guys gtg - I'll be back online in an hour
[
12:22pm
]
balunasj
:
thanks for coming and your opinions