balunasj
:
So I don't have an agenda prepared today - we've all been busy with the 3.3.2.SR1 release
[
10:03am
]
balunasj
:
and some planning for 4.0.
[
10:03am
]
lfryc left the chat room. ("Leaving")
[
10:04am
]
balunasj
:
QE has just verified the uploaded bits and ilya_shaikovsky and I will announce the 3.3.2.SR1 release shortly after the meeting
[
10:04am
]
balunasj
:
with the release of 3.3.2.SR1 we will also be combining this meeting and the tuesday team meeting because we will only have one release to discuss.
[
10:05am
]
alexsmirnov
:
Hi guys!
[
10:05am
]
balunasj
:
We can still have adhoc meetings when ever needed ( obviously ).
[
10:05am
]
pyaschenko joined the chat room.
[
10:05am
]
abelevich__
:
hi Alex
[
10:05am
]
pyaschenko
:
hi all
[
10:05am
]
LexD
:
Hi everybody
[
10:06am
]
nbelaevski
:
Konstantin, abelevich__, pyaschenko, alexsmirnov: hi sirs
[
10:06am
]
nbelaevski
:
LexD: good day
[
10:06am
]
alexsmirnov
:
There were no problem with deployment, as I saw in email
[
10:06am
]
balunasj
:
hello all
[
10:06am
]
balunasj
:
alexsmirnov: yup - all was verified by QE
[
10:06am
]
balunasj
:
[
10:06am
]
ppitonak
:
balunasj: hi
[
10:07am
]
balunasj
:
I just need to finish writing up the blog, and coordinate with Ilya for the release.
[
10:08am
]
balunasj
:
We are also waiting for a symbolic doc link for 3.3.2.SR1 to 3.3.2.GA because we had no doc changes
[
10:08am
]
balunasj
:
We should be in good shape - I have not seen any other critical issues pop up in the community
[
10:09am
]
•
balunasj
 
fingers-crossed
[
10:09am
]
balunasj
:
So this will be the last wednesday meeting - since we'll combine it with Tuesday
[
10:10am
]
balunasj
:
I announce that after the release as well.
[
10:10am
]
balunasj
:
Other than that we all need to shift gears into 4.0 full speed.
[
10:11am
]
balunasj
:
nbelaevski: and alexsmirnov and I has a meeting yesterday to start talking about major tasks and priorities.
[
10:12am
]
balunasj
:
We also need to discuss the AS 5.2 issue with the admin console and JSF 2.0
[
10:13am
]
balunasj
:
Lets talk about AS 5.2 for a bit so we can be synced up for the meeting tomorrow with the AS team.
[
10:15am
]
balunasj
:
This was focused around two RF/RFPL jira issues for now
[
10:15am
]
balunasj
:
https://jira.jboss.org/jira/browse/RF-7971
[
10:15am
]
balunasj
:
and https://jira.jboss.org/jira/browse/RFPL-183
[
10:16am
]
balunasj
:
alexsmirnov: in https://jira.jboss.org/jira/browse/RFPL-183 your last post you said you made some progress
[
10:16am
]
balunasj
:
with the latest mojarra release
[
10:17am
]
balunasj
:
nbelaevski: you also looked at RF-7971 and the fix had some risks for JSF 1.2 support - correct?
[
10:17am
]
balunasj
:
can both of you add some details?
[
10:17am
]
alexsmirnov
:
Yes, I have had simple Application running with Mojarra 2.0
[
10:17am
]
nbelaevski
:
yes, the fix can introduce some risk of functionality degrade for 3.3.x
[
10:20am
]
alexsmirnov
:
nbelaevski: Is that fix in the tree component ? We can provide customized tree component for Jboss admin console and do not touch anything else
[
10:20am
]
nbelaevski
:
UITree is based on UIData. for UITree row indexes are senseless, but in Mojarra 2.0 UIData walks by chidlren using these indexes. the problem is that MyFaces 1.2 also sets these indexes, so changing behavior of 3.3.x could affect MyFaces
[
10:20am
]
nbelaevski
:
alexsmirnov: it's in AbstractTreeModel
[
10:21am
]
balunasj
:
nbelaevski: ok so that is good info
[
10:21am
]
nbelaevski
:
resetting rowKey when row index is set is a possible fix, however this may change behavior of MyFaces 1.2
[
10:21am
]
nbelaevski
:
that's the risk
[
10:22am
]
balunasj
:
nbelaevski: is it possible to fix this issue for and get RI 1.2 and 2.0 working?
[
10:23am
]
nbelaevski
:
balunasj: I think yes, but it needs thorough fixing
[
10:23am
]
balunasj
:
nbelaevski: I could live with that as a type of "RichFaces 3.3/JSF 2.0" compatibility restrictions.
[
10:23am
]
nbelaevski
:
balunasj: and thorough testing
[
10:24am
]
balunasj
:
nbelaevski: agree but if we go this path it would be "tech preview" in a project sense
[
10:24am
]
balunasj
:
We would not put it out there was a full release - more of a way to make RF 3.3. apps work with JSF 2
[
10:25am
]
balunasj
:
But we need to decide if it is even worth it - because of other issues.
[
10:25am
]
nbelaevski
:
I think we can work on that
[
10:25am
]
balunasj
:
What other known issues are there.
[
10:26am
]
nbelaevski
:
I've checked quickly JSF 2.0 with richfaces-demo this spring - some components were broken, but mostly worked
[
10:26am
]
alexsmirnov
:
I worry about versions hell. If we are going to create special admin console version it would mess up even Jboss development team.
[
10:26am
]
nbelaevski
:
so we can put on automated tests suite and run with JSF 2.0
[
10:26am
]
alexsmirnov
:
So I prefer to isolate fix if it possible.
[
10:27am
]
balunasj
:
alexsmirnov: not sure what you mean by "isolated" you mean a separate branch built off 3.3.X?
[
10:28am
]
balunasj
:
alexsmirnov: That would be acceptable
[
10:28am
]
balunasj
:
nbelaevski: How much time would it take to get that going?
[
10:28am
]
balunasj
:
nbelaevski: probably even easier if we made a branch for this work
[
10:29am
]
nbelaevski
:
balunasj: that depends on the number of tests failing
[
10:30am
]
nbelaevski
:
balunasj: setting up environment is quick, analyses of results can take some time
[
10:30am
]
balunasj
:
nbelaevski: sure - I mean setting up the test, the build, getting the results?
[
10:30am
]
balunasj
:
nbelaevski: yes - it would include getting some analysis done of the results
[
10:30am
]
alexsmirnov
:
balunasj: I meant to not create special version but provide as little modified classes as possible as separate jar.
[
10:30am
]
balunasj
:
so we know what we are dealing with.
[
10:31am
]
nbelaevski
:
setting up special test builds I'd estimate in 1-1.5 days
[
10:31am
]
balunasj
:
alexsmirnov: ah ic - but where would that call live?  Likely a separate branch would be appropriate - do you think? 
[
10:31am
]
balunasj
:
nbelaevski: who can do this - only you or Alex?
[
10:31am
]
nbelaevski
:
1 day lag for tests execution and ~2 days for results analysis
[
10:32am
]
nbelaevski
:
balunasj: no
[
10:32am
]
nbelaevski
:
balunasj: do we need Hudson jobs for this?
[
10:32am
]
balunasj
:
nbelaevski: ideally, but I would think that only after we know what we are dealing with in more detail
[
10:32am
]
binnyg joined the chat room.
[
10:33am
]
nbelaevski
:
ok, so we can run tests locally just on dev. machine - this will save time
[
10:33am
]
balunasj
:
In other words if we do the analysis and it is obvious that this is not going to work - we drop it then ( that would be disapointing ).
[
10:34am
]
balunasj
:
If the analysis shows there are hurdles, but not insurmountable the I think we should set up a branch, update to run with JSF 2.0 and create some hudson builds for it.
[
10:34am
]
balunasj
:
nbelaevski: we can then discuss who and what needs to happen specifically.
[
10:35am
]
balunasj
:
This would be a part time effort I think ( although analysis would be fill time at first).
[
10:35am
]
nbelaevski
:
balunasj: agree
[
10:35am
]
alexsmirnov
:
balunasj: Meantime, AS guys investigate library loading and classloader problem. Let Jboss properly replace JSF implementation would be a better solution.
[
10:36am
]
balunasj
:
I think RichFaces needs a concrete answer for RF 3.3 and JSF 2.0
[
10:37am
]
balunasj
:
Either there is no way to do it, or ideally it is possible with limited changes and we educate each other and the community on how to do it.
[
10:37am
]
balunasj
:
alexsmirnov: You mean have the AS team load JSF 1.2 for the admin console for this initial release until we inderstand this more?
[
10:38am
]
balunasj
:
s/inderstand/understand
[
10:40am
]
alexsmirnov
:
balunasj: Yes, it will be more reliable solution. Also, that feature would be necessary for a lot of other applications, at least for migration time.
[
10:40am
]
alexsmirnov
:
Replacing JSF version is documented Jboss AS feature...
[
10:41am
]
balunasj
:
alexsmirnov: ic and agree - if they can provide users instructions for JFS 1.2 isolation it will buy us time to figure this out one way or another.
[
10:41am
]
balunasj
:
alexsmirnov: I think the goal would be app lvl replacement no server lvl - but yes I think this is a good approach for our meeting tomorrow.
[
10:42am
]
balunasj
:
nbelaevski: do you think you will have time to test this locally?
[
10:43am
]
nbelaevski
:
balunasj: sorry, what to test: functionality of admin console or RF + JSF 2.0 configuration?
[
10:44am
]
balunasj
:
nbelaevski: not admin console - the RF 3 + JSF 2 test/analysis
[
10:44am
]
balunasj
:
just to know what we are dealing with.
[
10:45am
]
balunasj
:
so for tomorrows meeting we'll go with this:
[
10:45am
]
nbelaevski
:
balunasj: ok, thanks. I think I can load up tests, it should not be very hard
[
10:45am
]
balunasj
:
1) we are investigating RF 3 and JSF 2 but that will take time
[
10:46am
]
balunasj
:
2) for short term AS team needs to investigate classloader isolation for JSF 1.2 apps
[
10:46am
]
balunasj
:
2.1) needed for other apps and situations anyway
[
10:46am
]
balunasj
:
Either RF 3 can be made to work and we'll work on that part time (focused initially on admin-console components)
[
10:47am
]
balunasj
:
or RF 3 can't be made to work ( we need to detail why publicly)
[
10:47am
]
alexsmirnov
:
nbelaevski: I checked in 'backwardCompatibility' project in examples-sandbox, it could be used to make per-component tests
[
10:47am
]
alexsmirnov
:
I mean necessary components only.
[
10:47am
]
balunasj
:
- and we focus on RF 4.0 only for JSF 2 and
[
10:47am
]
nbelaevski
:
alexsmirnov: I think it's better to run Selenium tests - they'll cover more than I can click
[
10:48am
]
balunasj
:
- again focus initially on admin-console components.
[
10:48am
]
balunasj
:
nbelaevski: Agree, but the app would be good for analyis phase I think
[
10:48am
]
nbelaevski
:
balunasj: ok, so we need results by tomorrow meeting, right?
[
10:48am
]
balunasj
:
nbelaevski: no - not if that is unreasonable
[
10:48am
]
nbelaevski
:
balunasj: alexsmirnov: ok, good. I'm keeping this application in mind
[
10:49am
]
balunasj
:
nbelaevski: If we can get the selenium tests running with JSF 2.0 and get very basic info - that would be great
[
10:50am
]
balunasj
:
nbelaevski: The analysis as you said will take more time
[
10:50am
]
alexsmirnov
:
I've created it to investigate proper configuration that lets RichFaces run on Jboss 5.2
[
10:51am
]
nbelaevski
:
balunasj: ok, got that
[
10:51am
]
nbelaevski
:
alexsmirnov: I will need help in cloning this configuration to photoalbum/richfaces-demo/selenium tests suite
[
10:52am
]
alexsmirnov
:
ok
[
10:53am
]
balunasj
:
alexsmirnov: nbelaevski : ok great guys - I feel much better about this now that we have a plan
[
10:54am
]
balunasj
:
lets break now - I've got to finish up the blog for the release and something else that need to take care of.
[
10:55am
]
balunasj
:
I'll write up minutes ( for yesterday meetings too ) later today.
[
10:55am
]
balunasj
:
nbelaevski: alexsmirnov : please let me know how things go
[
10:55am
]
alexsmirnov
:
balunasj: Sure
[
10:56am
]
nbelaevski
:
balunasj: sure
[
10:56am
]
balunasj
:
ilya_shaikovsky: When I finish the blog and review site updates I'll ping you ok
[
10:56am
]
ilya_shaikovsky
:
sure
[
10:56am
]
balunasj
:
ok thanks guys