balunasj
:
FYI - agenda is here - http://community.jboss.org/wiki/RichFacesTeamMeetingAgenda1-5-2010
[
11:07am
]
balunasj
:
lets get started
[
11:07am
]
ilya_shaikovsky
:
alexsmirnov, balunasj, I seems lost the beggining of your conversation
[
11:08am
]
ilya_shaikovsky
:
sorry
[
11:08am
]
ilya_shaikovsky
:
see next line now
[
11:08am
]
balunasj
:
ilya_shaikovsky: np - struberg mentioned that he had a hard time finding this info
[
11:08am
]
balunasj
:
quote - "maybe you should blog about that fact, because I searched 2 night evaluating lots of stuff before I found out that this works"
[
11:09am
]
balunasj
:
so the item up is the 3.3.3 release
[
11:09am
]
balunasj
:
In the agenda I added links to jira for the CR1 release for reference
[
11:10am
]
balunasj
:
With holidays and time off I do not think there has been much movement on this yet.
[
11:10am
]
balunasj
:
Lets start with an update from QE
[
11:10am
]
balunasj
:
any new issues found that need to be discussed?
[
11:10am
]
prabhat
:
balunasj: on 4.X?
[
11:11am
]
prabhat
:
balunasj: given that we had release right before Xmas and it's only been 2 days after break, we have not done any new testing
[
11:11am
]
balunasj
:
prabhat: nope on 3.3.3
[
11:11am
]
balunasj
:
prabhat: np - I understand.
[
11:12am
]
balunasj
:
ilya_shaikovsky: have you seen anything of note in forums?
[
11:12am
]
balunasj
:
I have not specific to 3.3.3
[
11:12am
]
ppitonak
:
I reopened RF-8204 -- AjaxStateManager
[
11:12am
]
prabhat
:
ppitonak: that's good
[
11:12am
]
prabhat
:
balunasj: so when are we going to decide on next release date for 3.3.3?
[
11:12am
]
balunasj
:
yup - just saw that this morning - although I'm not sure how "good" it is ;-0
[
11:13am
]
balunasj
:
[
11:13am
]
prabhat
:
balunasj: goodness is in knowing the problem
[
11:13am
]
prabhat
:
fixing is another beast
[
11:13am
]
balunasj
:
prabhat: I think next weeks team meeting - by then you should have completed some more testing, community hopefully have had a chance to review with feedback.
[
11:14am
]
balunasj
:
prabhat: at that point we'll decide if a BETA2 or a CR1 is appropriate
[
11:14am
]
ilya_shaikovsky
:
balunasj, I saw no serious issues.. but there were not much posts during holidays... And started to look only today because tommorow forums were down
[
11:14am
]
balunasj
:
ilya_shaikovsky: sure - np
[
11:14am
]
ilya_shaikovsky
:
tommorow = yesterday
[
11:14am
]
ilya_shaikovsky
:
[
11:14am
]
prabhat
:
balunasj: we would like to focus more on 4.x if possible and there is lot of planning (basic test development etc) to be done there
[
11:15am
]
lfryc
:
notice.. RF-8213 rf-demo (JSF2): Bean validators don't work (AS 6.0.0.M1)
[
11:15am
]
balunasj
:
prabhat: I though you were going to continue JSF 2 testing post release ( with at least one resource ) - right?
[
11:15am
]
OndejZizka joined the chat room.
[
11:15am
]
balunasj
:
lfryc: thank lukas - lets talk about that in a minute.
[
11:16am
]
prabhat
:
balunasj: you mean 3.3.3 + jsf2 not 4.x + JsF2, right?
[
11:16am
]
balunasj
:
prabhat: correct.
[
11:16am
]
balunasj
:
prabhat: I would image you + 1 resource for 4.0 planning and prep for meetings
[
11:17am
]
prabhat
:
balunasj: well, yes but 3.3.3 already has some testsuite developed but 4.x is nada
[
11:17am
]
balunasj
:
prabhat: and 1 for 3.3.3 testing during release
[
11:17am
]
balunasj
:
prabhat:
[
11:17am
]
prabhat
:
balunasj: and during release, you need all resources otherwise it's just plain wrong
[
11:17am
]
alexsmirnov
:
lfryc: I think it would be better to switch richfaces-demo to use JSR-303 in all cases.
[
11:17am
]
prabhat
:
balunasj: oops plain wrong --> plain long
[
11:18am
]
prabhat
:
in terms of time
[
11:18am
]
balunasj
:
prabhat: I'm referring to the time between QE cycles in the release
[
11:18am
]
lfryc
:
alexsmirnov: I agree
[
11:18am
]
balunasj
:
i.e. now until we provise the next tag, and release for QE.
[
11:18am
]
balunasj
:
s/provide/provise
[
11:19am
]
prabhat
:
balunasj: ya..of course but jsf2 test can be done in a way that benefits both 3.3 and 4.x
[
11:19am
]
prabhat
:
balunasj: well not 100% reuse but some
[
11:19am
]
balunasj
:
prabhat: its possible
[
11:20am
]
balunasj
:
prabhat: but my big concern here is something slipping through the cracks with 3.3.3
[
11:20am
]
balunasj
:
we can't afford to have another SP1 release
[
11:20am
]
ilya_shaikovsky
:
alexsmirnov, but did you remember the problem with Seam 2 and JSR 303 that I shown you ? thats why I still leaved old hibernate validator there
[
11:20am
]
prabhat
:
balunasj: so what I suggest that given the proximity of next beta release, it's better to focus on JSF2 + 3.3.3 and start on 4.x after that
[
11:20am
]
balunasj
:
prabhat: no placing blame at all
[
11:21am
]
prabhat
:
although I would like to focus on 4.x in ideal world
[
11:21am
]
balunasj
:
prabhat: you'll need someone - likely you working on 4.0 A2 planning meeting prep I would think.
[
11:21am
]
balunasj
:
prabhat: details in last mail, but will be on wiki today/tomorrow
[
11:22am
]
balunasj
:
post those meetings we should have all of our "ducks" in a row for A2
[
11:22am
]
prabhat
:
balunasj: let's take this offline
[
11:22am
]
balunasj
:
[
11:22am
]
balunasj
:
prabhat: agreed
[
11:23am
]
balunasj
:
lfryc: prabhat : any update from jopr team?
[
11:23am
]
prabhat
:
nope
[
11:23am
]
lfryc
:
OndejZizka: can you please update?
[
11:23am
]
balunasj
:
Can someone follow up with them - I'll be meeting with Shelly next week to discuss this, but should have some updates before.
[
11:25am
]
balunasj
:
I do not want to release a CR1 without the JOPR tests passing
[
11:26am
]
OndejZizka
:
Hi,
[
11:26am
]
balunasj
:
OndejZizka: hello :-0
[
11:26am
]
balunasj
:
[
11:26am
]
OndejZizka
:
regarding EmbJopr, there are problems caused by Seam, which prevent it being deployed on AS M2
[
11:26am
]
OndejZizka
:
Seam team will probably do an internal release targetting this.
[
11:27am
]
balunasj
:
OndejZizka: that is the target release though right?
[
11:27am
]
balunasj
:
OndejZizka: It is not perfect but is there a way to execute the jopr tests on a release of AS that does work with it?
[
11:28am
]
balunasj
:
OndejZizka: i.e.  JSF 2 + RF 3.3.3
[
11:28am
]
OndejZizka
:
balunasj: No way...
[
11:28am
]
OndejZizka
:
If it does not work, then the tests have no chance to run
[
11:28am
]
amarkhel left the chat room. (Read error: 54 (Connection reset by peer))
[
11:29am
]
balunasj
:
OndejZizka:   have you had any estimates on when the seam release would be or when this issue might be resolved?
[
11:29am
]
OndejZizka
:
Actually the TS is even more vulnerable than running EJ in a browser
[
11:29am
]
amarkhel joined the chat room.
[
11:29am
]
balunasj
:
TS ?
[
11:30am
]
balunasj
:
test suite
[
11:30am
]
balunasj
:
nevermind
[
11:30am
]
OndejZizka
:
balunasj: Well, with AS 6, everything is in a "SNAPSHOT-mode", and there are no solid plans almost nowhere. Everyone says "in few weeks".
[
11:30am
]
OndejZizka
:
Seam release is planned in days IIRC
[
11:30am
]
balunasj
:
OndejZizka: I'll contact shelly offline for details, but this is a problem for the 3.3.3 release
[
11:31am
]
balunasj
:
OndejZizka: 50% of the reason for this release was to give jopr a way to run with JSF 2 and RF 3.3.3
[
11:31am
]
balunasj
:
OndejZizka: we'll have to take this offline as well - thanks for the update though
[
11:32am
]
balunasj
:
lets move on the dev plans for 3.3.3
[
11:32am
]
OndejZizka
:
balunasj: Happy to help, I wish there were better news.
[
11:32am
]
balunasj
:
amarkhel and Alex_Kolonitsky: what % of time do you plan on spending on 3.3.3 jiras? and have you had a chance to review them?
[
11:33am
]
•
balunasj
 
thinking need to get back to two reopened issues
[
11:35am
]
balunasj
:
ppitonak: please add some more details to https://jira.jboss.org/jira/browse/RF-8204 r. the test that you made and/or links to source for them.
[
11:35am
]
ppitonak
:
balunasj: I'm just writing a comment
[
11:35am
]
balunasj
:
ppitonak:
[
11:36am
]
amarkhel
:
balunasj: I reviewed the jira's and think that at least 5-6 issues is trivial and I could fix them tomorrow, after that I review other more closely and will be work on 4.0 skins
[
11:36am
]
balunasj
:
amarkhel: ok excellent - once you review the others please let me know - I'll take a closer look as well. 
[
11:36am
]
amarkhel
:
balunasj:ok
[
11:36am
]
balunasj
:
amarkhel: if anything seems risky please let me know.
[
11:37am
]
amarkhel
:
balunasj:nothing for now
[
11:37am
]
balunasj
:
amarkhel & Alex_Kolonitsky : great - I would prefer to get 3.3.3 dev issue resolved asap so that we can shift focus for you guys to 4.0
[
11:37am
]
balunasj
:
then as issues come in we can address as needed.
[
11:38am
]
balunasj
:
lfryc: this issue - https://jira.jboss.org/jira/browse/RF-8213
[
11:38am
]
balunasj
:
you brought before.
[
11:38am
]
balunasj
:
is it just a demo issue, or could it be pointing to a general bug
[
11:38am
]
balunasj
:
alexsmirnov - you commented on this above as well.
[
11:38am
]
smcgowan joined the chat room.
[
11:39am
]
lfryc
:
alexsmirnov: balunasj: it's demo issue, but it is related to Seam 2 usage afaik..
[
11:39am
]
balunasj
:
smcgowan: Hi Shelly - I'll need to talk to you offline about jopr issues with seam and testsuite so we can make sure RF 3.3.3 is working for you.
[
11:40am
]
smcgowan
:
balunasj:  ozizka and I just had a con call about that
[
11:40am
]
balunasj
:
smcgowan: OndejZizka just told us about the seam issue that it will be hard to have it running well soon.
[
11:40am
]
smcgowan
:
balunasJ:  RF is fine, EMBJOPR not so much
[
11:40am
]
balunasj
:
lfryc: ok good
[
11:41am
]
balunasj
:
smcgowan: my concern is some unknown issue with RF 3.3.3 and jopr that would require an update to RF after we release - that would be bad
[
11:41am
]
alexsmirnov
:
lfryc: I've created automatic validator library detection for user convinience What is better to avoid such problems: use all presented libraries together or introduce configuration option for manual choice ?
[
11:41am
]
smcgowan
:
balunasj:  understood, this issues needs to be resolved ASAP and in time prior to your GA release
[
11:42am
]
balunasj
:
ppitonak: I think we'll need to have nick review https://jira.jboss.org/jira/browse/RF-8204 and back to you - I am not "up" on that one.
[
11:42am
]
smcgowan
:
balunasj:  prabhat and I had a con call b4 vacation to discuss the timing
[
11:42am
]
balunasj
:
ppitonak: he'll be back next week.
[
11:42am
]
balunasj
:
smcgowan: yeah that is the problem - how to get it tested prior to GA
[
11:43am
]
smcgowan
:
balunasj:  is your schedule posted somewhere?  we need EMBJOPR for our AS 6 M2 release as well
[
11:44am
]
balunasj
:
smcgowan: because of the nature of the new JSF 2.0 support we wanted to wait for more feedback and testing before deciding on a BETA2 or CR1 for the next release ( likely end of month, early Feb ).
[
11:44am
]
balunasj
:
smcgowan: We'll post it at next weeks meeting.
[
11:45am
]
balunasj
:
ok so lets move on the last couple of topics for this meeting
[
11:46am
]
balunasj
:
There was some confusion and discussion about RF-8057 and whether it was a feature request or a bug that we won't fix.
[
11:47am
]
balunasj
:
amarkhel: you investigated this issue - was the conflict with the defaultText something that would mean this could never been fixed, or just not in the scope of 3.3.3?
[
11:48am
]
ilya_shaikovsky
:
balunasj, It looks like a bug actually for me.. because we never designed that something will not be selectable.. but this bug lived so long before found that now looks like feature request And what even worse additional functionality of default label makes quick and simple fix impossible for now as Andrey wrote up in issue
[
11:49am
]
balunasj
:
hehe - what a little circle
[
11:50am
]
ilya_shaikovsky
:
it require additional work to support both default label and select nothing features but the worst that fix is risky and could change original behavior somehow which also seems not acceptable before last 3.3. release
[
11:50am
]
amarkhel
:
balunasj: completely agree with Ilya
[
11:51am
]
balunasj
:
ilya_shaikovsky: amarkhel : just so we are on the same page - I'm not suggesting fixing this in 3.3.3 - it seems clear that a fix for this would be too risky for a point release.
[
11:52am
]
balunasj
:
I'm just discussing if it is a valid feature request - regardless of effort required.
[
11:52am
]
ilya_shaikovsky
:
And b.t.w. comboBox script requires additional clean up and review as we agreed some time ago(but still not started to do ). Now it's highly maintainable and thats why the fix is too risky
[
11:52am
]
balunasj
:
could be used as part of 4.0 planning requirements for the component etc...
[
11:53am
]
ilya_shaikovsky
:
balunasj, I'm sure it should works as customer said
[
11:53am
]
balunasj
:
ilya_shaikovsky: ok so it is a valid feature request, but not for 3.3.3
[
11:53am
]
ilya_shaikovsky
:
And he is not alone we were already asked about the same by other guys
[
11:53am
]
ilya_shaikovsky
:
unfortunatelly seems so
[
11:54am
]
ilya_shaikovsky
:
and b.t.w. how about to spend some time to provide some "patch" as workaround.. which should be used as is and not go to release?
[
11:54am
]
balunasj
:
We should label it someway to mark it - so we consider it for 4.0.
[
11:54am
]
balunasj
:
ilya_shaikovsky: it would depend on effort and time required.
[
11:55am
]
ilya_shaikovsky
:
for 3.3.x guys I mean.. just point them to some script changes direction
[
11:55am
]
balunasj
:
amarkhel: any guesses on a rough workaround?
[
11:55am
]
ilya_shaikovsky
:
amarkhel, how do you think if it complex?
[
11:55am
]
ilya_shaikovsky
:
[
11:57am
]
abelevich
:
how about add &nbsp as a selectOption ? ...
[
11:57am
]
amarkhel
:
yes it is complex and no easy workarounds founded
[
11:57am
]
abelevich
:
or #160
[
11:58am
]
amarkhel
:
I can try, but I am not sure what this will work
[
11:58am
]
alexsmirnov
:
balunasj: RF-8204 is not actual for RF 4.0 because JSF 2.0 already keep state ID unchanged for AJAX requests.
[
12:01pm
]
balunasj
:
amarkhel: if you have some time and could investigate it would be good, but would not want you to spend much time on it.  I like you suggestion of #160 btw
[
12:01pm
]
balunasj
:
amarkhel: if it starts getting complex we'll talk
[
12:01pm
]
balunasj
:
alexsmirnov: But this has to do with 3.3.3 stuff that Nick did to help performance - iirc
[
12:02pm
]
lfryc
:
alexsmirnov: balunasj: back to RF-8213 online.. How Alex explained me, it is possible to use both hibernate-validators (3 and 4) together on classpath and use Alex's swich implementation, but it needs modification of Validator component itself
[
12:02pm
]
balunasj
:
alexsmirnov: So if that is not working on tomcat nick might need to take a look - after vacation.
[
12:04pm
]
amitev left the chat room. ("Although nobody can come back and make a new start, anyone can start now and make a new end")
[
12:04pm
]
alexsmirnov
:
balunasj: It requires a little change in the factory that instantiates actual validator class. It would create a "chain" of validators instead of the "OR" decision.
[
12:05pm
]
lfryc
:
balunasj: so we can implement it and verify across the containers, but i'm not sure it is essential
[
12:05pm
]
balunasj
:
lets talk about one at a time - I can multitask, but....
[
12:05pm
]
lfryc
:
ok, sorry
[
12:06pm
]
balunasj
:
alexsmirnov: so is that a fix for RF-8204 - or something that needs to be investigated a little more?
[
12:08pm
]
alexsmirnov
:
balunasj: Yes, it is. It would also prevent similar issues in user applications and lets them smooth way to migrate from Hibernate validator to JSR.
[
12:09pm
]
balunasj
:
alexsmirnov: ok good - is this something you have time to look at, or should we wait for Nick to get back since we worked on the original issue?
[
12:09pm
]
balunasj
:
alexsmirnov: sorry I think we crossed wires
[
12:09pm
]
balunasj
:
I was still talking about RF-8204, but I think you started talking about the validator.
[
12:10pm
]
pmuir
:
alexsmirnov: hi
[
12:11pm
]
alexsmirnov
:
balunasj: I guess it would take hour or two for implementation. The only side effect may be little performance decrease when both validators are run for the same value.
[
12:11pm
]
balunasj
:
alexsmirnov: could that cause issue with which validator runs and when?
[
12:12pm
]
alexsmirnov
:
Oops, no I got multytasking problem
[
12:12pm
]
balunasj
:
RF-8204 - leaving for Nick to take a look at - since he did original perf changes.
[
12:12pm
]
balunasj
:
alexsmirnov: np
[
12:13pm
]
balunasj
:
pmuir: just saying hi, or did you have a comment - did not want to move on otherwise?
[
12:13pm
]
balunasj
:
alexsmirnov: the validator change, sounds like it might be a bit too much for point release
[
12:13pm
]
pmuir
:
I think alexsmirnov wanted me here for something?
[
12:14pm
]
alexsmirnov
:
RF-8204: we have already discussed that with Nick. The best solution seems to use JSF 2.0 State manager instead of richfaces.
[
12:14pm
]
lfryc
:
balunasj: I'm also worried
[
12:15pm
]
alexsmirnov
:
pmuir: Sorry, I just want to tell that I'm little bit busy
[
12:16pm
]
pmuir
:
alexsmirnov: oic, ok
[
12:17pm
]
balunasj
:
alexsmirnov: RF-8204 -does that mean reverting the perf changes that Nick already put in?
[
12:20pm
]
abelevich left the chat room. (Read error: 60 (Operation timed out))
[
12:20pm
]
balunasj
:
alexsmirnov: ping
[
12:20pm
]
alexsmirnov
:
balunasj: I'm not sure. For common sence, removing additional layer should always improve performance.
[
12:21pm
]
•
ilya_shaikovsky
 
îòîøåë (autoaway - õðàíèòåëü ýêðàíà) incompatible encoding
[
12:21pm
]
ilya_shaikovsky is now known as ilya_shaikovsky|.
[
12:21pm
]
balunasj
:
alexsmirnov: hmm, ok lets talk more about this when Nick gets back - I would like to understand better.
[
12:21pm
]
balunasj
:
alexsmirnov: regarding RF-8213 - is the items you were talking about "nice to have" or needed for support?
[
12:23pm
]
rruss joined the chat room.
[
12:24pm
]
alexsmirnov
:
balunasj: I've changed my mind from "nice to have" to "have to" because I see too many problems even it our own examples.
[
12:25pm
]
balunasj
:
alexsmirnov: and you think the risk of the change in minor?
[
12:25pm
]
prabhat
:
balunasj: i agree with alexsmirnov
[
12:25pm
]
prabhat
:
brb
[
12:25pm
]
balunasj
:
alexsmirnov: how would order be established?  is it needed?
[
12:27pm
]
alexsmirnov
:
I developed that feature so users can choice that library are used by application dependencies only. Because JEE 6 has JSR-303 in the spec, there in no more way to remove JSR classes from application.
[
12:28pm
]
alexsmirnov
:
I do not see any use-case when order is important.
[
12:29pm
]
balunasj
:
alexsmirnov: ok - I'll think on that, but lets go with your idea
[
12:29pm
]
balunasj
:
I need to get going, but alexsmirnov I also would like to talk to you offline about some CDK/composite component topics at some point.
[
12:29pm
]
balunasj
:
I'll ping you some other time
[
12:30pm
]
alexsmirnov
:
Ok.
[
12:30pm
]
balunasj
:
great
[
12:31pm
]
balunasj
:
ok all  - thanks, and I'll post the minutes later today.