IDE TF Minutes 2007-04-19

From MemberWiki

Jump to: navigation, search

URL: http://www.openajax.org/member/wiki/IDE_TF_Minutes_2007-04-12

Contents

Attendees this week

  • Jon Ferraiolo <jferrai(at)us.ibm.com>
  • Phil Berkland <berkland(at)us.ibm.com> representing Eclipse ATF project
  • Bertrand Le Roy <Bertrand.Le.Roy(at)microsoft.com>

Regrets this week

  • Kevin Hakman <khakman(at)tibco.com>
  • Wayne Beaton <wayne(at)eclipse.org>

Absent this week

  • Greg Murray <greg.murray(at)sun.com>
  • Ted Thibodeau <tthibodeau(at)openlinksw.com>
  • Andrei Dragomir <adragomi(at)adobe.com>
  • Ric Smith <richard.allen.smith(at)oracle.com>
  • John Crupi <john.crupi(at)jackbe.com>
  • Paul Colton <paul(at)aptana.com>
  • Ingo Muschenetz <ingo(at)aptana.com>
  • Frank Nimphius <frank.nimphius(at)oracle.com>
  • Shane Caraveo <shanec(at)activestate.com>
  • BJ Hargrave <hargrave(at)us.ibm.com>
  • Alex Russell <alex(at)dojotoolkit.org>
  • Yossi Leon <yossi(at)zend.com>
  • Andre Charland <andre.charland(at)nitobi.com
  • Mike Han <mike.han(at)nitobi.com>
  • Bruce Johnson <bruce(at)google.com>

Original agenda

Minutes

Charter's mission and scope

Jon: I think Kevin had an unintentional omission and only talked about widgets, visual and non-visual, whereas last week we also wanted to cover public APIs from the methods exposed by Ajax libraries. So I added those to the draft charter. OK?

Phil/Bertrand: Good

Phil: We need to add a statement about handling debug versions of libraries. We talked about that last week. IDEs needs to support Ajax debug library vs an Ajax runtime library.

Jon: You are right.

Bertrand: Totally agree with that. Almost never debug the release version.

Jon: I will highlight this to Kevin.

NOTE: Need to add text to charter about debug vs non-debug

Charter's work plan and deliverables

Jon: The charter says we will produce two documents, use cases and requirements and a spec. Any comments? What about the proposed titles for the documents?

Phil: Title is broader than the descriptive text. Probably a good thing.

Jon: I will highlight this observation to Kevin so he can decide what to do about it.

NOTE: Document titles are broader than their description. Is that OK?

Phil: In the 3rd bullet under mission and scope, we talk about IDE features, but that's not mentioned in the document descriptions. I would think we would want one of our documents to include something about IDE features.

Jon: OK. The generalization is that we need to review the descriptions of the documents against the topics listed under mission and scope.

NOTE: We need to review the descriptions of the documents against the topics listed under mission and scope.

Charter's coordination requirements

Jon: Oh, I see a typo. The fourth bullet should say "Security TF". (Note: This has now been fixed.) Any other comments on this section?

(no comments)

Charter's duration

Jon: Any comments on the WG lasting until Dec 2008?

(no comments)

Charter's milestones

Jon: Kevin only had one milestone. I changed it so that there are 3 milestones. Looking at what Kevin had originally, maybe he was thinking that the WG would have a finished/approved spec by end of 2007. That seems too aggressive.

Bertrand: Yes

Jon: But my changes would have a finished/approved spec by summer of 2008. Maybe that is not aggressive enough. What timeframe should we shoot for to finish a 1.0 spec?

Bertrand: When will people be ready to ship implementations of the spec?

Phil: ATF is ready right away.

Bertrand: On our side, we have already implemented overlapping features. At some point we will need to adapt our software. The question is when IDE vendors will integrate before setting schedules, of course not to be bound by any vendor's schedule, but see if there is a wave coming up.

Jon: I agree. I expect at least 5 IDEs to support the spec as soon as it is ready. (Jon rattles off the names of some IDE efforts from members of OpenAjax Alliance.)

Phil: In IBM, the Rational product teams will likely support the spec because of their use of Eclipse ATF which will likely support it right away.

Jon: There is a good chance that some IDEs will support the spec as it is being developed, which will give us good feedback and promote higher quality.

NOTE: We should do some research about product schedules and more discussion to inform us about what dates we should include in the charter.

Charter's success and completion criteria

Bertrand: What is meant by "popular and specialized? Some or all?

Jon: I assume "some".

NOTE: Insert the word "some".

Phil: Important that success is not just IDE adoption but also toolkits supporting this spec and exposing their APIs using the spec.

Jon/Bertrand: Yes.

NOTE: Need to add success criteria about toolkits supporting the spec.

Next steps

Jon: I assume we will meet next week. I hope that next week will be the end of discussion on the charter so we can start making progress on technical issues.

Personal tools