OpenLiberty / open-liberty

Open Liberty is a highly composable, fast to start, dynamic application server runtime environment
https://openliberty.io
Eclipse Public License 2.0
1.16k stars 599 forks source link

API-5, API-7: Epic for delivering MicroProfile 1.4 and 2.0 #4663

Closed kwsutter closed 6 years ago

kwsutter commented 6 years ago

This epic will be used to cover both MicroProfile 1.4 and 2.0: https://bigblue.aha.io/features/API-5 https://bigblue.aha.io/features/API-7

MicroProfile 1.4 is based on Java EE 7 technologies, while MicroProfile 2.0 is based on Java EE 8 technologies. The updated component features for both of these releases are the same and are tracked via their own features and epics.

gkwan-ibm commented 6 years ago

Serviceability Approval Comment - Please answer the following questions for serviceability approval (note that this is a new approval step -- comments welcome on how to improve it):

  1. WAD -- does the WAD identify the most likely problems customers will see and identify how the feature will enable them to diagnose and solve those problems without resorting to raising a PMR? Have these issues been addressed in the implementation?

  2. Test and Demo -- As part of the new serviceability process we're asking feature teams to test and analyze common problem paths for serviceability and demo those problem paths to someone not involved in the development of the feature (eg. L2, test team, or another development team).
    a) What problem paths were tested and demonstrated? b) Who did you demo to? c) Do the people you demo'd to agree that the serviceability of the demonstrated problem scenarios is sufficient to avoid PMRs for any problems customers are likely to encounter, or that L2 should be able to quickly address those problems without need to engage L3?

  3. SVT -- SVT team is often the first team to try new features and often encounters problems setting up and using them. Note that we're not expecting SVT to do full serviceability testing -- just to sign-off on the serviceability of the problem paths they encountered. a) Who conducted SVT tests for this feature? b) Do they agree that the serviceability of the problems they encountered is sufficient to avoid PMRs, or that L2 should be able to quickly address those problems without need to engage L3?

  4. Queues -- Which L2 / L3 queues will handle PMRs for this feature? Do the respective L2 / L3 teams know they are supporting it?

kwsutter commented 6 years ago

@gkwan-ibm Serviceability for MicroProfile is really covered by the component features that make up the MicroProfile platform. If a user utilizes one of the microProfile-1.x or microProfile-2.0 convenience features, any problems will be associated with and directed to the respective component features that make up the platform. I will still try to answer your questions...

  1. Yes, the WAD addresses the Serviceability question in the same light as my initial response above.

  2. and 3. I have asked the SVT team to test all flavors of the server.xml configuration when testing the respective component features. For example, when testing the updates for mpJwt-1.1, the test coverage should utilize the standalone mpJwt-1.1 feature, as well as run the tests with the microProfile-1.4 and microProfile-2.0 features.

  3. The respective queues for each component will be utilized. These top-level convenience features do not have individual support queues.

kwsutter commented 6 years ago

ID Issue: https://github.ibm.com/was-liberty/liberty-docs/issues/377

bsbyrd1 commented 6 years ago

My approval is based on the sizing of the ID work, and the expectation that the ID work can be completed before the last ID translation drop.

dave-waddling commented 6 years ago

FAT Focal Approval: Please can you complete the Feature Test Summary issue (#4754) that has been added to your Epic. This issue is what is used to review the FAT testing and obtain the FAT focal approval. This feature pulls together the delivery of a number of other features, each of which will have their own FAT focal approval, so please use this Feature Test Summary to describe any additional testing which isn't covered in the epics listed in the description. Many thanks!

dave-waddling commented 6 years ago

FAT Focal Approval: Given that JWT (#4479) is not going to be approved for 3Q due to a TCK not being in automation I don't believe it will be possible to grant a FAT Focal Approval for this epic given that it covers the delivery of that work.

kwsutter commented 6 years ago

@dave-waddling I heard from @chunlongliang-ibm that we can still ship JWT with a manual run of the TCK, so we should be back in business for a 3Q delivery for both JWT and these platform, convenience MicroProfile features. I will complete your FAT issue #4754 .

dave-waddling commented 6 years ago

@kwsutter That's great news, thank you! I've read through the Feature Test Summary and it's as I'd expected for this Epic. A couple of the other related features still need to get their approvals through so this Epic should end up getting approved on Friday (2018-08-24);I'm agreeable to approving this Epic even though JWT won't be approved (it's good enough that the JWT Epic remains open to ensure the delivery of the TCK automation).

kwsutter commented 6 years ago

WAD link (may not be accessible outside of IBM): https://ibm.box.com/s/av9dgzce0k2qmgz3h7jgnzmak7r8hlhs

dave-waddling commented 6 years ago

FAT Focal Approval: Granting approval as per the call.

kwsutter commented 6 years ago

All approvals in place and functionality delivered!