Raw Text from SCA-J TC conf call, 9th Feb 2009

[Mike Edwards <mike_edwards@uk.ibm.com>]

Agenda:
- Roll Call
http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/membership.php?wg_abbrev=sca-j
- Appointment of scribe. List attached
below
- Agenda bashing
- Approval of minutes from Virtual Face
to Face (2nd, 3rd and 6th February)
http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/download.php/31113/SCA%20Java%20Virtual%20Face%20to%20Face%20Minutes%20-%202009-02-02%2C%2003%20and%2006.doc
 
 
Issue Status:
Open: 31
 
 
1. Review action items:
 
Action Items that I believe are done:
2008-11-11-07: Mark to propose a delta
to Simon's action (2008-11-11-6) on JAVA-25 to add support for message
correlation on call backs
2008-11-11-12: Mark to write proposal
for JAVA-46 drawing inspiration from the chat log of day 2 of the November
F2F
 
Action Items that I believe are still
to be done:
2008-07-15-02: Plamen to produce a proposal
for JAVA-2
2008-11-11-21: Mark, Jim and Mike to
describe their use cases for JAVA-30
2008-11-11-22: Mark to draw up some
wording for Direction 1 (as discussed at the November F2F) for JAVA-62
2008-11-11-23: Mark (and others prepared
to help) to investigate the WorkManager JEE spec and determine its applicability
to SCA for JAVA-62
2008-11-11-27: Simon to raise issue
on brain-damaged definition of @Service annotation (see comments in Nov
F2F raw chat log)
 
 
2. Blocking issues
 
a. JAVA-27: Security Annotations in
generated Component Type
http://www.osoa.org/jira/browse/JAVA-27
Updated proposal (PDF): http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/sca-j/200902/msg00060.html
Updated proposal (Doc): http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/sca-j/200902/msg00059.html
 
 
3. Critical Issue discussion
 
a. JAVA-6: @AllowsPassByReference requires
more detailed description
http://www.osoa.org/jira/browse/JAVA-30
Original Proposal: http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/sca-j/200902/msg00053.html
Updated Proposal: http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/sca-j/200902/msg00072.html
 
b. JAVA-1: Accessing SCA Services from
non-SCA component code
http://www.osoa.org/jira/browse/JAVA-1
Proposal: http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/sca-j/200901/msg00094.html
Source Code Proposal: http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/sca-j/200902/msg00050.html
 
 
4. Other Open Issues discussion
 
a. JAVA-30: "Process" Scope
http://www.osoa.org/jira/browse/JAVA-30
proposal: http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/sca-j/200812/msg00006.html
 
b. JAVA-117: Clarify the name implied
by setter method for property and reference names
http://www.osoa.org/jira/browse/JAVA-117
Proposal: http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/sca-j/200901/msg00124.html
 
c. JAVA-65: There is no lifecycle defined
for SCA Components
http://www.osoa.org/jira/browse/JAVA-65
proposal: http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/sca-j/200811/msg00095.html
 
d. JAVA-102: Need to have a Name parameter
on the @Service annotation
proposal: http://www.osoa.org/jira/browse/JAVA-102
 
e. JAVA-77: A remotable service SHOULD
be translatable into a generally accepted standard for a service, such
as WSDL 1.1 or WSDL 2.0
http://www.osoa.org/jira/browse/JAVA-30
proposal: http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/sca-j/200901/msg00029.html
 
f. JAVA-62: Clarify what a Component
Implementation can do with threads
proposal: http://www.osoa.org/jira/browse/JAVA-62
 
g. JAVA-125: Allow call semantics to
be specified in interface.java
Proposal: http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/sca-j/200902/msg00074.html
 
 
5. Blocking issues waiting for updates/proposals
 
a. JAVA-104: RFC2119 Language is needed
for CAA Specification
http://www.osoa.org/jira/browse/JAVA-104
 
b. JAVA-105: RFC2119 Language is needed
for C&I Specification
http://www.osoa.org/jira/browse/JAVA-105
 
c. JAVA-119: JAA Conformance Section
http://www.osoa.org/jira/browse/JAVA-119
Updated proposal: http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/sca-j/200902/msg00021.html
Alternative proposal: http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/sca-j/200902/msg00049.html
Waiting for email discussion and new
proposal
 
 
6. Critical issues waiting for updates/proposals
 
a. JAVA-60: Sharing Java artifacts across
contributions
http://www.osoa.org/jira/browse/JAVA-60
Proposal: http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/sca-j/200902/msg00014.html
Waiting for updated proposal
 
b. JAVA-54: Section 7.1 of the Java
CAA Specification is unclear
http://www.osoa.org/jira/browse/JAVA-54
No proposal
 
c. JAVA-121: Compilable artifacts for
Java annotations and APIs
http://www.osoa.org/jira/browse/JAVA-121
More detailed proposal required
 
 
7. AOB
 
 
---------------------------------------------------------------

Scribe = Mike Edwards
Item. Agenda Bashing
Item 2. Approval of Minutes from Virtual
F2F
Approved unanimously
Item 3. Review of Action Items
Action Items that done:
2008-11-11-07: Mark to propose a delta
to Simon's action (2008-11-11-6) on JAVA-25 to add support for message
correlation on call backs
2008-11-11-12: Mark to write proposal
for JAVA-46 drawing inspiration from the chat log of day 2 of the November
F2F
Action items are outstanding:
2008-07-15-02: Plamen to produce a proposal
for JAVA-2
2008-11-11-21: Mark, Jim and Mike to
describe their use cases for JAVA-30
2008-11-11-22: Mark to draw up some
wording for Direction 1 (as discussed at the November F2F) for JAVA-62
2008-11-11-23: Mark (and others prepared
to help) to investigate the WorkManager JEE spec and determine its applicability
to SCA for JAVA-62
2008-11-11-27: Simon to raise issue
on brain-damaged definition of @Service annotation (see comments in Nov
F2F raw chat log)
Item 4. JAVA-27: Security Annotations
in generated Component Type
http://www.osoa.org/jira/browse/JAVA-27
Updated proposal (PDF): http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/sca-j/200902/msg00060.html
Updated proposal (Doc): http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/sca-j/200902/msg00059.html
Vamsi: wow. no more blocking issues

Mark Combellack: vamsi - there are still
3 blocking issues 104, 105 and 119
Motion: Yange Lei - To resolve Issue
27 with the proposal contained in http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/sca-j/200902/msg00060.html
Seconded by Dave Booz
Accepted unanimously
Issue 27 is resolved.
Item 5. JAVA-6: @AllowsPassByReference
requires more detailed description
http://www.osoa.org/jira/browse/JAVA-30
Original Proposal: http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/sca-j/200902/msg00053.html
Updated Proposal: http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/sca-j/200902/msg00072.html
Simon describes his proposal in sca-javacaa-1.1-spec-cd02-rev1
Merge2-1 Issue6.doc
Starting at Section 2.2.3
Mike E's First comment - relating to
the phrase "same operating system process and the same JVM runtime"
(paragraph 1)
anish: i think same JVM is enuf, but
don't have a preference for either sentence
Preference for just "same JVM runtime"
2nd paragraph - make clear that "implementation"
here means both client and service implementations
Suggest making "compatible with
pass-by-reference optimizatio" bold/italic to help make it clear that
its a defintion of a term
Suggest adding some wording to make
it clear that there are some rules for the client and the service impl
in order to make the claim of "compatible with pass-by-reference optimiatioN"
Simon suggests pulling forward words
from section 9 for this.
Add "see below" to the 4 bullet
of the 1st bulleted list
Add "method" following "service
implementation" in 3rd bullet of 1st bulleted list
anonymous morphed into anonymousPradeep
anonymousPradeep morphed into Pradeep
Vamsi: There is a typo in 1st para in
sec 2.2.3. implementation instead of implemementation
Section 9.1
(note - addition of "exceptions"
in section 3.2)
Correct the term "within the same
address space" in 1st paragraph following the definition code
Discussion of the use of the term "mutable"
in 1st paragraph following definition code.
Simon will work to improve the wording
of the 1st paragraph.
Mike E's alternative wording for the
1st paragraph
Simon is not keen on MUST / MUST NOT
wording
anish: I don't agree with the notion
that every keyword 'must' be testable using an automated tool.
anish: lot of times it is useful to
have keywords which are not necessarily enforceable, or can be checked
by an automated tool. But a human can go in there and make a determination
Vamsi: I agree with Simon.
anish anyone else getting lot of noise
on teh line intermittently ?
Discussion of Mike's proposed changes
to the 2nd paragraph
Dave Booz yes
Question about the use of (optional)
in the attribute definition
anish: + to explicit
anish: i meant "+1"
Dave B: Not clear from the definition
that @AllowsPassByReference has to be in the same place that @Reference
occurs
Dave B: Happy for the annotation to
be separate from @Reference annotation
Action: (Simon) build an updated version
of the proposal for Friday
Item 6 JAVA-1: Accessing SCA Services
from non-SCA component code
http://www.osoa.org/jira/browse/JAVA-1
Proposal: http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/sca-j/200901/msg00094.html
Source Code Proposal: http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/sca-j/200902/msg00050.html
Mark describes his code proposal
Dave Booz lowered your hand
Mike Edwards notes that this proposal
makes the client now dependent on the SCAClientFactory class - and that
the proposal implies shipping an actual implementation of this class, using
the mechanics specified.  Note that this is incompatible with OSGi
class loading for example
Simon: Not happy with us having to ship
the actual code of SCAClientFactory - too rigid and difficult to update
for new mechanisms
Simon: java.util.ServiceLoader - available
in JDK 6 - provides a way of delegating the loading to some place that
we dont' have to ship with the standard
Simon: I'd like to consider a better
way to package this function. Perhaps Mark & I can work on it.
Action: (Mark & Simon) Work up a
better proposal for the function proposed by Mark for Issue 1
COB - next call is on Friday


Yours,  Mike.

Strategist - Emerging Technologies, SCA & SDO.
Co Chair OASIS SCA Assembly TC.
IBM Hursley Park, Mail Point 146, Winchester, SO21 2JN, Great Britain.
Phone & FAX: +44-1962-818014    Mobile: +44-7802-467431  
Email:  mike_edwards@uk.ibm.com

---

Unless stated otherwise above:
IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number 741598.
Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU