[wtp-pmc] Fw: Agenda for PMC call Tuesday, October 10, 2006

[David M Williams <david_williams@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Call info:

• Tollfree in the US: 866-214-3176
• Alternate: 404-827-9098
• Access code: 8870689#

Call Time: 7am PDT / 10am PDT
/ 4pm CEST!
 
Regrets: Tim, Naci, Jochen

Agenda:

• Community
  • EclipseCon – monitor EclipseZilla ... how?
    • http://dev.eclipse.org/mhonarc/lists/wtp-pmc/msg00910.html
    • EclipseWorld this week
    • Process issues [Tim]
      • EMO Council meetings this week
      • Requirements and 2.0 Planning
      • 1.5.2 and 2.0 Status (David)
                      http://www.eclipse.org/webtools/plans/1.5.2/pmc-bug-approval.php        
      • Visual editor component [Jean]
        • Summary and Open Items from last meeting?
          • Seperate Component? Or part of JSF Project/Component?
            • Can we get a proposal and plan in writing? (sometimes I can't hear exactly what's said on phone).
            • Assuming seperate component, still need committers and a leader named
            • We heard commitmants to provide JUnit tests, re-organize, if needed, as appropriate so can be used for HTML, and JSP, as well as JSF, and we heard the intent to make product quality.
            • We (well, ok, me :)  still need to do code and design review of contribution to provide feedback.
            • Dali/JPA [Neil]
            • JSF [Raghu]
            • ATF [Bob]
            
                            http://dev.eclipse.org/mhonarc/lists/wtp-pmc/msg00910.html
            
                    Some comments on Bob's comments
                    Why no HTTPD Server? We thought you were doing it :)
                  Mozilla on Mac? Is this related to "Mozilla Everywhere" bug 154124
                    Sounds like Bob is offering to take-over/replace _javascript_ component?
                            Don't forget we have requirement that component maintain its integrated _javascript_ experience (for example, same content assist from HTML Editor, as from JS editor).
                            On the plan to "copy JDT and change for _javascript_" ... are you sure not better to "copy CDT and change for _javascript_"? They've gone through some of that abstraction language neutrality already.