From sacadmin Thu Jun 14 18:43:04 2007 Received: from sac.sfbay.sun.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l5F1h4We012093; Thu, 14 Jun 2007 18:43:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from llc@localhost) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8/Submit) id l5F1h3re012089; Thu, 14 Jun 2007 18:43:03 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2007 18:43:03 -0700 (PDT) From: "Lloyd L. Chambers" Message-Id: <200706150143.l5F1h3re012089@sac.sfbay.sun.com> To: WSARC@sac.sfbay.sun.com Cc: Siraj.Ghaffar@Sun.Com Subject: GlassFish V2 Service Tag Support [WSARC/2007/351 FastTrack timeout 06/21/2007] Status: RO Content-Length: 5427 Template Version: @(#)sac_nextcase 1.63 06/14/07 SMI This information is Copyright 2007 Sun Microsystems 1. Introduction 1.1. Project/Component Working Name: GlassFish V2 Service Tag Support 1.2. Name of Document Author/Supplier: Author: Siraj Ghaffar 1.3 Date of This Document: 14 June, 2007 4. Technical Description 1. Introduction 1.1. Project/Component Working Name: Service Tags Support for Glassfish v2/Sun Java System Application Server 9.1 1.2. Name(s) and e-mail address of Document Author(s)/Supplier: Siraj Ghaffar : Siraj.Ghaffar@Sun.Com 1.3. Date of This Document: June 14, 2007 2. Project Summary 2.1. Project Description: This project introduces support for Service Tags in Glassfish, using the Service Tag Registry client. Service Tag Registry is a local repository containing a list of product instances installed on a system. Refer to ARC case PSARC/2006/683/ for details of the Service Tags project. With this support built in, Glassfish installer will register Glassfish in the Service Tag Registry, during installation. Service Tags are eventually retrieved and sent to Sun for various business purposes. Refer to Section 1.2 of the Service Tags functional specification at http://sac.sfbay/PSARC/2006/683/commitment.materials/ST_ARC_v4.pdf for details on business motivations for collecting this data. 2.2. Risks and Assumptions: The project depends on timely delivery of the Service Tag Registry tool, "stclient", and its associated components. The tool is expected to be available in Solaris 10 Update 4. 3. Problem Summary 3.1. Problem Area: Sun cannot measure its install base of products. This applies to Glassfish as well. Glassfish support for Service Tags enables querying mechanisms to discover Glassfish installations. Refer to Section 1.2 of the Service Tags functional specification at http://sac.sfbay/PSARC/2006/683/commitment.materials/ST_ARC_v4.pdf for a description of goals and objectives. The description applies to Glassfish, as it does to other Sun products. 3.2. Justification: Service Tag support is a required feature of Glassfish 4. Technical Description: 4.1. Details: Service Tag Registry is a local repository containing a list of product instances installed on the system. This project introduces support for Glassfish registration in the Service Tag Registry, using the command line interface, "stclient". This interface is part of the Service Tag project and will be available with Solaris 10 update 4. Other platforms are likely to be supported later. The stclient tool requires product identification from Project SwordFish (http://metadata.central.sun.com). A product ID has already been obtained for Glassfish. This project adds a new script, "servicetag_wrapper" to Glassfish. This script will call the stclient tool with Glassfish specific parameters. The Glassfish installer will invoke "servicetag_wrapper" during installation. The user will be able to invoke "servicetag_wrapper", when upgrading to Solaris 10 update 4 (or later) after GlassFish has been installed. Refer to Section 2 of Service Tag Functional spec at http://sac.sfbay/PSARC/2006/683/commitment.materials/ST_ARC_v4.pdf for architecture and technical details of the Service Tags Project. 4.2. Bug/RFE Number(s): None 4.3. In Scope: The mechanism to add and delete the service tag registry entry for Glassfish (outside JES) 4.4. Out of Scope: Mechanisms to query the service tag registry entry from the client machine and send information back to Sun. 4.5. Interfaces: 4.5.1 Exported Interfaces Interface: Registration script (servicetag_wrapper) Stability: unstable Comments:Referred in section 4.1, 4.6 4.5.2 Imported interfaces Interface: ST CLI (stclient) Stability: Stable Exporting Project: Sun Service Tag ARC Case PSARC/2006/683 Comments: Referred in section 2.2, 4.1 4.6. Doc Impact: Documentation on how to invoke the "servicetag_wrapper" script. 4.7. Admin/Config Impact: None. 4.8. HA Impact: None. 4.9. I18N/L10N Impact: None. 4.10. Packaging & Delivery: This will be part of the Glassfish installer code. This feature is not available on GlassFish jar distribution available from java.net. It will be available in Sun branded distributions. 4.11. Security Impact: None 4.12. Compatibility Impact None 4.13. Dependencies: Depends on delivery of Service Tag Registry command line interface, "stclient" and its associated components in a timely fashion. It is expected that the interface will be available in Solaris 10 Update 4. 5. Reference Documents: Service Tag ARC Case : PSARC/2006/683/ Service Tags Functional Spec : http://sac.sfbay/PSARC/2006/683/commitment.materials/ST_ARC_v4.pdf stclient CLI : http://sac.sfbay/PSARC/2006/683/commitment.materials/stclient.pdf Umbrella case for Sun Java System Application Server 9.0(includes Glassfish installer): WSARC/2005/229/ 6. Schedule: 6.1. Projected Availability: June 2007 6. Resources and Schedule 6.4. Steering Committee requested information 6.4.1. Consolidation C-team Name: GlassFish 6.5. ARC review type: FastTrack 6.6. ARC Exposure: open From sacadmin Fri Jun 15 04:13:11 2007 Received: from phorcys.east.sun.com (phorcys.East.Sun.COM [129.148.174.143]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l5FBDBPG022267; Fri, 15 Jun 2007 04:13:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from phorcys.east.sun.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by phorcys.east.sun.com (8.14.1+Sun/8.14.1) with ESMTP id l5FBBaSF019339; Fri, 15 Jun 2007 07:11:36 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from carlsonj@localhost) by phorcys.east.sun.com (8.14.1+Sun/8.14.1/Submit) id l5FBBagA019336; Fri, 15 Jun 2007 07:11:36 -0400 (EDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <18034.29672.663925.382303@gargle.gargle.HOWL> Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2007 07:11:36 -0400 From: James Carlson To: "Lloyd L. Chambers" Cc: WSARC@sac.sfbay.sun.com, Siraj.Ghaffar@Sun.COM Subject: Re: GlassFish V2 Service Tag Support [WSARC/2007/351 FastTrack timeout 06/21/2007] In-Reply-To: <200706150143.l5F1h3re012089@sac.sfbay.sun.com> References: <200706150143.l5F1h3re012089@sac.sfbay.sun.com> X-Mailer: VM 7.01 under Emacs 21.3.1 Status: RO Content-Length: 875 Lloyd L. Chambers writes: > This project introduces support for Service Tags in Glassfish, using the > Service Tag Registry client. Service Tag Registry is a local repository containing > a list of product instances installed on a system. Refer to ARC case > PSARC/2006/683/ for details of the Service Tags project. With this support built > in, Glassfish installer will register Glassfish in the Service Tag Registry, during > installation. Given that it's dependent on 2006/683, this project may have a bit of a process problem. The project team for 2006/683 did not complete ARC review and the product seems to have shipped without it. -- James Carlson, Solaris Networking Sun Microsystems / 1 Network Drive 71.232W Vox +1 781 442 2084 MS UBUR02-212 / Burlington MA 01803-2757 42.496N Fax +1 781 442 1677 From sacadmin Fri Jun 15 08:51:37 2007 Received: from sfbaymail2sca.sfbay.sun.com (sfbaymail2sca.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.145.155.42]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l5FFpaSt027306 for ; Fri, 15 Jun 2007 08:51:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sca-es-mail-1.sun.com (sca-es-mail-1.Sun.COM [192.18.43.132]) by sfbaymail2sca.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.6+Sun/8.12.10/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l5FFo42c002772 for ; Fri, 15 Jun 2007 08:50:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from fe-sfbay-09.sun.com ([192.18.43.129]) by sca-es-mail-1.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id l5FFnxlf010719 for ; Fri, 15 Jun 2007 08:49:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from conversion-daemon.fe-sfbay-09.sun.com by fe-sfbay-09.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-8.04 (built Feb 28 2007)) id <0JJO00401P9TO400@fe-sfbay-09.sun.com> (original mail from Lloyd.Chambers@Sun.COM) for WSARC@sac.sfbay.sun.com; Fri, 15 Jun 2007 08:49:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.1.8] (llc4.com [208.65.183.162]) by fe-sfbay-09.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-8.04 (built Feb 28 2007)) with ESMTPSA id <0JJO00K3XPB7TD30@fe-sfbay-09.sun.com> for WSARC@sac.sfbay.sun.com; Fri, 15 Jun 2007 08:49:58 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2007 08:49:54 -0700 From: Lloyd L Chambers Subject: Re: GlassFish V2 Service Tag Support [WSARC/2007/351 FastTrack timeout 06/21/2007] In-reply-to: <18034.29672.663925.382303@gargle.gargle.HOWL> Sender: Lloyd.Chambers@Sun.COM To: James Carlson , Siraj Ghaffar Cc: WSARC@sac.sfbay.sun.com Message-id: <07209724-DFDA-476F-92A9-E8D7313AE48A@sun.com> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.752.3) Content-type: text/plain; format=flowed; delsp=yes; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT References: <200706150143.l5F1h3re012089@sac.sfbay.sun.com> <18034.29672.663925.382303@gargle.gargle.HOWL> Status: RO Content-Length: 1211 James, Thank you. SIRAJ, why are we depending on a facility that did not complete an ARC review? If an ARC review was too much trouble for the Service Tags team, what does that say about depending on such a facility? Lloyd On Jun 15, 2007, at 4:11 AM, James Carlson wrote: > Lloyd L. Chambers writes: >> This project introduces support for Service Tags in Glassfish, >> using the >> Service Tag Registry client. Service Tag Registry is a local >> repository containing >> a list of product instances installed on a system. Refer to ARC case >> PSARC/2006/683/ for details of the Service Tags project. With >> this support built >> in, Glassfish installer will register Glassfish in the Service >> Tag Registry, during >> installation. > > Given that it's dependent on 2006/683, this project may have a bit of > a process problem. The project team for 2006/683 did not complete ARC > review and the product seems to have shipped without it. > > -- > James Carlson, Solaris Networking > > Sun Microsystems / 1 Network Drive 71.232W Vox +1 781 442 > 2084 > MS UBUR02-212 / Burlington MA 01803-2757 42.496N Fax +1 781 442 > 1677 From sacadmin Fri Jun 15 09:30:56 2007 Received: from sfbaymail1sca.SFBay.Sun.COM (sfbaymail1sca.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.145.154.35]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l5FGUt94029393 for ; Fri, 15 Jun 2007 09:30:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sca-es-mail-2.sun.com (sca-es-mail-2.Sun.COM [192.18.43.133]) by sfbaymail1sca.SFBay.Sun.COM (8.13.6+Sun/8.13.6/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l5FGTNne001831 for ; Fri, 15 Jun 2007 09:29:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from fe-sfbay-09.sun.com ([192.18.43.129]) by sca-es-mail-2.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id l5FGTHwN017349 for ; Fri, 15 Jun 2007 09:29:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: from conversion-daemon.fe-sfbay-09.sun.com by fe-sfbay-09.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-8.04 (built Feb 28 2007)) id <0JJO00I01QO7NF00@fe-sfbay-09.sun.com> (original mail from Lloyd.Chambers@Sun.COM) for WSARC@sac.sfbay.sun.com; Fri, 15 Jun 2007 09:29:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.1.8] (diglloyd.com [208.65.183.162]) by fe-sfbay-09.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-8.04 (built Feb 28 2007)) with ESMTPSA id <0JJO00KJOR4KTD30@fe-sfbay-09.sun.com> for WSARC@sac.sfbay.sun.com; Fri, 15 Jun 2007 09:29:09 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2007 09:29:08 -0700 From: Lloyd L Chambers Subject: re: WSARC/2007/351 FastTrack GlassFish Service tags Sender: Lloyd.Chambers@Sun.COM To: WSARC@sac.sfbay.sun.com Message-id: <121C9B57-A057-4144-BE63-D7319E22E0F1@Sun.COM> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.752.3) Content-type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Boundary_(ID_aDpbCP90RbmMlNtQujXUUQ)" References: <4672BD99.9050709@sun.com> Status: RO Content-Length: 17157 --Boundary_(ID_aDpbCP90RbmMlNtQujXUUQ) Content-type: text/plain; format=flowed; delsp=yes; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT [forwarding so it is seen by WSARC members, and goes into the mail log] Begin forwarded message: From: Pat Ryan Date: June 15, 2007 9:26:01 AM PDT To: Siraj Ghaffar Cc: Brandon E Taylor , Lloyd L Chambers , Abhijit Kumar Subject: Re: [Fwd: Re: GlassFish V2 Service Tag Support [WSARC/ 2007/351 FastTrack timeout 06/21/2007]] Siraj, Service Tags started the ARC process and met with PSARC two times (2006/683). Service Tags were then exempted from ARC Approval requirements by the Solaris PTeam and PAC. At that time, PSARC requested that SysNet file an umbrella case providing an overview of the entire Sun Connection product from SysNet including the Service Tag case. The one pager has been submitted - 2007/330. At this time Service Tags 1.0 are integrated into Solaris 10U4 and ILOM2. Both of which will release in July. Additionally we are working with 14 other engagements with over 60 products to be released in the next two quarters. Attached is a presentation from SysNet's VP that shows the committments made by product teams to integrate with Service Tags. 50% of Sun's revenue products will have Service Tags 1.0 integrated by the end of FY'07. Regards, Pat Siraj Ghaffar wrote: > Hi Pat, Brandon, > Has the Service Tag project not gone through the ARC process? We > have issues going through WSARC as the Glassfish support for > Service Tags depends on the Service Tags project. > > Thanks > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > -- > > Subject: > Re: GlassFish V2 Service Tag Support [WSARC/2007/351 FastTrack > timeout 06/21/2007] > From: > Lloyd L Chambers > Date: > Fri, 15 Jun 2007 08:49:54 -0700 > To: > James Carlson , Siraj Ghaffar > > > To: > James Carlson , Siraj Ghaffar > > CC: > WSARC@sac.sfbay.sun.com > > > James, > > Thank you. > > SIRAJ, why are we depending on a facility that did not complete an > ARC review? > > If an ARC review was too much trouble for the Service Tags team, > what does that say about depending on such a facility? > > Lloyd > > On Jun 15, 2007, at 4:11 AM, James Carlson wrote: > >> Lloyd L. Chambers writes: >>> This project introduces support for Service Tags in >>> Glassfish, using the >>> Service Tag Registry client. Service Tag Registry is a local >>> repository containing >>> a list of product instances installed on a system. Refer to >>> ARC case >>> PSARC/2006/683/ for details of the Service Tags project. With >>> this support built >>> in, Glassfish installer will register Glassfish in the >>> Service Tag Registry, during >>> installation. >> >> Given that it's dependent on 2006/683, this project may have a bit of >> a process problem. The project team for 2006/683 did not complete >> ARC >> review and the product seems to have shipped without it. >> >> --James Carlson, Solaris Networking >> >> Sun Microsystems / 1 Network Drive 71.232W Vox +1 781 >> 442 2084 >> MS UBUR02-212 / Burlington MA 01803-2757 42.496N Fax +1 781 >> 442 1677 > --Boundary_(ID_aDpbCP90RbmMlNtQujXUUQ) Content-type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE [forwarding so it is seen by = WSARC members, and goes into the mail log]

Begin for= warded message:

From: Pa= t Ryan <Pat.Ryan@Sun.COM&g= t;
Date: June 15, 2007 9:26:01 AM PDT
=
To: Siraj Ghaffar <Siraj.= Ghaffar@Sun.COM>
Cc: Brandon E Taylor <Brandon.Taylor@Sun.COM>, L= loyd L Chambers <Lloyd.C= hambers@Sun.COM>, Abhijit Kumar <Abhijit.Kumar@Sun.COM>
Subject: <= FONT face=3D"Helvetica" size=3D"3" style=3D"font: 12.0px Helvetica"><= B>Re: [Fwd: Re: GlassFish V2 Service Tag Support [WSARC/2007/351 Fast= Track timeout 06/21/2007]]

Siraj,

Service T= ags started the ARC process and met with PSARC two times (2006/683).<= SPAN class=3D"Apple-converted-space">=A0 Service Tags were the= n exempted from ARC Approval requirements by the Solaris PTeam and PA= C.=A0 At that time,=A0 PSARC requested that SysN= et file an umbrella case providing an overview of the entire Sun Conn= ection product from SysNet including the Service Tag case.=A0 =A0 The one pager has been subm= itted - 2007/330.

At this time Service Tags 1.0 are integrated = into Solaris 10U4 and ILOM2.= =A0 Both of which will release in July.=A0 Additionally we are working with 14 other e= ngagements with over 60 products to be released in the next two quart= ers.=A0 Attached is a pr= esentation from SysNet's VP that shows=A0 the committments made by product teams to integrate= with Service Tags. =A0 = 50% of Sun's revenue products will have Service Tags 1.0 integrated b= y the end of FY'07.

<= /DIV>
Regards,
Pat


Siraj Ghaffar wrot= e:
Hi Pat, Brand= on,
Has the Service Tag project not gone th= rough the ARC process? We have issues going through WSARC as the Glas= sfish support for Service Tags depends on the Service Tags project.

Thanks


--= ---------------------------------------------------------------------= -

Subject:
Re: GlassFish V2 Servic= e Tag Support [WSARC/2007/351 FastTrack timeout 06/21/2007]
From:
Lloyd L Chambers <= ;Lloyd.Chambers@Sun.COM= >
Date:
Fri, 1= 5 Jun 2007 08:49:54 -0700
To:
James Carlson <James.D.Carlson@Sun.COM>, Siraj Ghaffar <Siraj.Ghaffar@Sun.COM>

To:
James Carlson <James.D.Carlson@Sun.COM>, Siraj Ghaffar <<= A href=3D"mailto:Siraj.Ghaffar@Sun.COM">Siraj.Ghaffar@Sun.COM>=
CC:


James,

Thank you= .

SIRAJ, why are we depending on a facility that did not com= plete an ARC review?

=
If an ARC review was too much trouble for = the Service Tags team, what does that say about depending on such a f= acility?

Lloyd

=
On Jun 15, 2007, at 4:11 AM, James Carlson= wrote:

Lloyd L. Chambers writes:
=A0 =A0 This project introduces support fo= r Service Tags in Glassfish, using the
=A0 =A0 Service Tag Registry= client. Service Tag Registry is a local repository containing
<= DIV style=3D"margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; = margin-left: 0px; ">=A0 =A0 a list of product instances installed on a system. Refer to ARC c= ase
= =A0 =A0 PSARC/2006/683/ for details of the Service Tags projec= t. With this support built
=A0 =A0 in, Glassfish installer will reg= ister Glassfish in the Service Tag Registry, during
=A0 =A0 insta= llation.
Given that it's dependent on 2006/683, t= his project may have a bit of
a process pro= blem.=A0 The project tea= m for 2006/683 did not complete ARC
review = and the product seems to have shipped without it.

--James C= arlson, Solaris Networking=A0 = =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 <james.d.carlson@sun.com>
Su= n Microsystems / 1 Network Drive =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 71.232W =A0 Vox +1 781 442 2084
MS UBUR02-= 212 / Burlington MA 01803-2757 = =A0 42.496N =A0 F= ax +1 781 442 1677

[forwarding so it is seen by = WSARC members, and goes into the mail log]

Begin for= warded message:

From: Pa= t Ryan <Pat.Ryan@Sun.COM&g= t;
Date: June 15, 2007 9:26:01 AM PDT
=
To: Siraj Ghaffar <Siraj.= Ghaffar@Sun.COM>
Cc: Brandon E Taylor <Brandon.Taylor@Sun.COM>, L= loyd L Chambers <Lloyd.C= hambers@Sun.COM>, Abhijit Kumar <Abhijit.Kumar@Sun.COM>
Subject: <= FONT face=3D"Helvetica" size=3D"3" style=3D"font: 12.0px Helvetica"><= B>Re: [Fwd: Re: GlassFish V2 Service Tag Support [WSARC/2007/351 Fast= Track timeout 06/21/2007]]

Siraj,

Service T= ags started the ARC process and met with PSARC two times (2006/683).<= SPAN class=3D"Apple-converted-space">=A0 Service Tags were the= n exempted from ARC Approval requirements by the Solaris PTeam and PA= C.=A0 At that time,=A0 PSARC requested that SysN= et file an umbrella case providing an overview of the entire Sun Conn= ection product from SysNet including the Service Tag case.=A0 =A0 The one pager has been subm= itted - 2007/330.

At this time Service Tags 1.0 are integrated = into Solaris 10U4 and ILOM2.= =A0 Both of which will release in July.=A0 Additionally we are working with 14 other e= ngagements with over 60 products to be released in the next two quart= ers.=A0 Attached is a pr= esentation from SysNet's VP that shows=A0 the committments made by product teams to integrate= with Service Tags. =A0 = 50% of Sun's revenue products will have Service Tags 1.0 integrated b= y the end of FY'07.

<= /DIV>
Regards,
Pat


Siraj Ghaffar wrot= e:
Hi Pat, Brand= on,
Has the Service Tag project not gone th= rough the ARC process? We have issues going through WSARC as the Glas= sfish support for Service Tags depends on the Service Tags project.

Thanks


--= ---------------------------------------------------------------------= -

Subject:
Re: GlassFish V2 Servic= e Tag Support [WSARC/2007/351 FastTrack timeout 06/21/2007]
From:
Lloyd L Chambers <= ;Lloyd.Chambers@Sun.COM= >
Date:
Fri, 1= 5 Jun 2007 08:49:54 -0700
To:
James Carlson <James.D.Carlson@Sun.COM>, Siraj Ghaffar <Siraj.Ghaffar@Sun.COM>

To:
James Carlson <James.D.Carlson@Sun.COM>, Siraj Ghaffar <<= A href=3D"mailto:Siraj.Ghaffar@Sun.COM">Siraj.Ghaffar@Sun.COM>=
CC:


James,

Thank you= .

SIRAJ, why are we depending on a facility that did not com= plete an ARC review?

=
If an ARC review was too much trouble for = the Service Tags team, what does that say about depending on such a f= acility?

Lloyd

=
On Jun 15, 2007, at 4:11 AM, James Carlson= wrote:

Lloyd L. Chambers writes:
=A0 =A0 This project introduces support fo= r Service Tags in Glassfish, using the
=A0 =A0 Service Tag Registry= client. Service Tag Registry is a local repository containing
<= DIV style=3D"margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; = margin-left: 0px; ">=A0 =A0 a list of product instances installed on a system. Refer to ARC c= ase
= =A0 =A0 PSARC/2006/683/ for details of the Service Tags projec= t. With this support built
=A0 =A0 in, Glassfish installer will reg= ister Glassfish in the Service Tag Registry, during
=A0 =A0 insta= llation.
Given that it's dependent on 2006/683, t= his project may have a bit of
a process pro= blem.=A0 The project tea= m for 2006/683 did not complete ARC
review = and the product seems to have shipped without it.

--James C= arlson, Solaris Networking=A0 = =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 <james.d.carlson@sun.com>
Su= n Microsystems / 1 Network Drive =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 71.232W =A0 Vox +1 781 442 2084
MS UBUR02-= 212 / Burlington MA 01803-2757 = =A0 42.496N =A0 F= ax +1 781 442 1677

> Additionally we are working with 14 other engagements with over 60 >> products >> to be released in the next two quarters. > > This only reinforces the need for 2006/683 to get approval. If there > are problems with 2006/683 they are only going to be magnified as > these other 60 products are shipped with dependencies on 2006/683. > > I think this case can move forward but it needs the standard text: > >> The project depends on the following other project and may >> not be delivered before it... > > Chris > > From: Lloyd L Chambers > Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2007 09:29:08 -0700 > > [forwarding so it is seen by WSARC members, and goes into the > mail log] > > Begin forwarded message: > > From: Pat Ryan > Date: June 15, 2007 9:26:01 AM PDT > To: Siraj Ghaffar > Cc: Brandon E Taylor , Lloyd L Chambers > , Abhijit Kumar > Subject: Re: [Fwd: Re: GlassFish V2 Service Tag Support [WSARC/ > 2007/351 FastTrack timeout 06/21/2007]] > > Siraj, > > Service Tags started the ARC process and met with PSARC two times > (2006/683). Service Tags were then exempted from ARC Approval > requirements by the Solaris PTeam and PAC. At that time, PSARC > requested that SysNet file an umbrella case providing an overview of > the entire Sun Connection product from SysNet including the Service > Tag case. The one pager has been submitted - 2007/330. > > At this time Service Tags 1.0 are integrated into Solaris 10U4 and > ILOM2. Both of which will release in July. Additionally we are > working with 14 other engagements with over 60 products to be > released in the next two quarters. Attached is a presentation from > SysNet's VP that shows the committments made by product teams to > integrate with Service Tags. 50% of Sun's revenue products will > have Service Tags 1.0 integrated by the end of FY'07. > > Regards, > Pat > > > Siraj Ghaffar wrote: >> Hi Pat, Brandon, >> Has the Service Tag project not gone through the ARC process? We >> have issues going through WSARC as the Glassfish support for >> Service Tags depends on the Service Tags project. >> >> Thanks >> >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> - >> -- >> >> Subject: >> Re: GlassFish V2 Service Tag Support [WSARC/2007/351 FastTrack >> timeout 06/21/2007] >> From: >> Lloyd L Chambers >> Date: >> Fri, 15 Jun 2007 08:49:54 -0700 >> To: >> James Carlson , Siraj Ghaffar >> >> >> To: >> James Carlson , Siraj Ghaffar >> >> CC: >> WSARC@sac.sfbay.sun.com >> >> >> James, >> >> Thank you. >> >> SIRAJ, why are we depending on a facility that did not complete an >> ARC review? >> >> If an ARC review was too much trouble for the Service Tags team, >> what does that say about depending on such a facility? >> >> Lloyd >> >> On Jun 15, 2007, at 4:11 AM, James Carlson wrote: >> >>> Lloyd L. Chambers writes: >>>> This project introduces support for Service Tags in >>>> Glassfish, using the >>>> Service Tag Registry client. Service Tag Registry is a local >>>> repository containing >>>> a list of product instances installed on a system. Refer to >>>> ARC case >>>> PSARC/2006/683/ for details of the Service Tags project. With >>>> this support built >>>> in, Glassfish installer will register Glassfish in the >>>> Service Tag Registry, during >>>> installation. >>> >>> Given that it's dependent on 2006/683, this project may have a >>> bit of >>> a process problem. The project team for 2006/683 did not complete >>> ARC >>> review and the product seems to have shipped without it. >>> >>> --James Carlson, Solaris Networking >>> >>> Sun Microsystems / 1 Network Drive 71.232W Vox +1 781 >>> 442 2084 >>> MS UBUR02-212 / Burlington MA 01803-2757 42.496N Fax +1 781 >>> 442 1677 >> > > > > --Boundary_(ID_UAYIh4wcDd3D1P4TjZ86oQ) > Content-type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 > Content-transfer-encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE > > space; = > -khtml-line-break: after-white-space; ">[forwarding so it is seen > by = > WSARC members, and goes into the mail log]

Begin > for= > warded message:

sty= > le=3D"margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; > margin-= > left: 0px; "> color=3D"#000000" st= > yle=3D"font: 12.0px Helvetica; color: #000000">From: FONT> ONT face=3D"Helvetica" size=3D"3" style=3D"font: 12.0px > Helvetica">Pa= > t Ryan <Pat.Ryan@Sun.COM A>&g= > t;
marg= > in-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; "> =3D"3" color=3D"#000000" style=3D"font: 12.0px Helvetica; color: > #000= > 000">Date: =3D"font: 12.0px Helvetica">June 15, 2007 9:26:01 AM PDT DIV>= >
0px; ma= > rgin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; "> =3D"Helvetica" size=3D"3" color=3D"#000000" style=3D"font: 12.0px > Hel= > vetica; color: #000000">Cc: face=3D"Helvetica" si= > ze=3D"3" style=3D"font: 12.0px Helvetica">Brandon E Taylor < hre= > f=3D"mailto:Brandon.Taylor@Sun.COM">Brandon.Taylor@Sun.COM A>>, L= > loyd L Chambers < href=3D"mailto:Lloyd.Chambers@Sun.COM">Lloyd.C= > hambers@Sun.COM>, Abhijit Kumar < href=3D"mailto:Abhijit.= > Kumar@Sun.COM">Abhijit.Kumar@Sun.COM>
=3D"margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; > margin-le= > ft: 0px; "> styl= > e=3D"font: 12.0px Helvetica; color: #000000">Subject: FONT><= > FONT face=3D"Helvetica" size=3D"3" style=3D"font: 12.0px > Helvetica"><= > B>Re: [Fwd: Re: GlassFish V2 Service Tag Support [WSARC/2007/351 > Fast= > Track timeout 06/21/2007]]
top: = > 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; min- > hei= > ght: 14px; ">
right: = > 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">Siraj,
=3D"margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; > margin-le= > ft: 0px; min-height: 14px; ">
0px;= > margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; > ">Service T= > ags started the ARC process and met with PSARC two times > (2006/683).<= > SPAN class=3D"Apple-converted-space">=A0 Service Tags were > the= > n exempted from ARC Approval requirements by the Solaris PTeam > and PA= > C.=A0 At that > time, class=3D"Apple-converted-space">=A0 PSARC requested that > SysN= > et file an umbrella case providing an overview of the entire Sun > Conn= > ection product from SysNet including the Service Tag case. class= > =3D"Apple-converted-space">=A0 =A0 The one pager has been > subm= > itted - 2007/330.
right: 0= > px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; min-height: 14px; > ">
IV>
bottom: 0= > px; margin-left: 0px; ">At this time Service Tags 1.0 are > integrated = > into Solaris 10U4 and ILOM2.= > =A0 Both of which will release in July. class=3D"Apple-co= > nverted-space">=A0 Additionally we are working with 14 > other e= > ngagements with over 60 products to be released in the next two > quart= > ers.=A0 Attached is > a pr= > esentation from SysNet's VP that shows converted-= > space">=A0 the committments made by product teams to > integrate= > with Service Tags. =A0 SPAN>= > 50% of Sun's revenue products will have Service Tags 1.0 > integrated b= > y the end of FY'07.
right:= > 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; min-height: 14px; > ">
<= > /DIV>
bottom:= > 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">Regards,
0px= > ; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">Pat DIV= >>
; margin-left: 0px; min-height: 14px; ">
style=3D"margi= > n-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: > 0px; = > min-height: 14px; ">
margin-r= > ight: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">Siraj Ghaffar > wrot= > e:
mar= > gin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">Hi Pat, > Brand= > on,
bot= > tom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">Has the Service Tag project not > gone th= > rough the ARC process? We have issues going through WSARC as the > Glas= > sfish support for Service Tags depends on the Service Tags > project. DIV>
bottom: = > 0px; margin-left: 0px; min-height: 14px; ">
style=3D"ma= > rgin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin- > left: 0p= > x; ">Thanks
0px; ma= > rgin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; min-height: 14px; ">
DIV> V style=3D"margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: > 0px; ma= > rgin-left: 0px; min-height: 14px; ">
style=3D"margin-to= > p: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; > ">--= > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------= > -
botto= > m: 0px; margin-left: 0px; min-height: 14px; ">
=3D"margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; > margin-le= > ft: 0px; ">Subject:
right:= > 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">Re: GlassFish V2 > Servic= > e Tag Support [WSARC/2007/351 FastTrack timeout 06/21/2007] DIV> style=3D"margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; > mar= > gin-left: 0px; ">From:
rig= > ht: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">Lloyd L Chambers > <= > ; href=3D"mailto:Lloyd.Chambers@Sun.COM">Lloyd.Chambers@Sun.COM= > >
margin-bo= > ttom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">Date:
top: 0= > px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; > ">Fri, 1= > 5 Jun 2007 08:49:54 -0700
margin-= > right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">To:
sty= > le=3D"margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; > margin-= > left: 0px; ">James Carlson < href=3D"mailto:James.D.Carlson@Sun.= > COM">James.D.Carlson@Sun.COM>, Siraj Ghaffar < href=3D"ma= > ilto:Siraj.Ghaffar@Sun.COM">Siraj.Ghaffar@Sun.COM> DIV>
tyle=3D"margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; > margi= > n-left: 0px; min-height: 14px; ">
top: = > 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; > ">To: DIV>
bottom: = > 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">James Carlson < href=3D"mailto:James.D.= > Carlson@Sun.COM">James.D.Carlson@Sun.COM>, Siraj Ghaffar > <<= > A href=3D"mailto:Siraj.Ghaffar@Sun.COM">Siraj.Ghaffar@Sun.COM A>>= >
bottom= > : 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">CC:
0px; ma= > rgin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; "> href=3D"m= > ailto:WSARC@sac.sfbay.sun.com">WSARC@sac.sfbay.sun.com DIV>
style=3D"margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; > marg= > in-left: 0px; min-height: 14px; ">
top:= > 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; > min-he= > ight: 14px; ">
right: = > 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">James,
=3D"margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; > margin-le= > ft: 0px; min-height: 14px; ">
0px;= > margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">Thank > you= > .
botto= > m: 0px; margin-left: 0px; min-height: 14px; ">
=3D"margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; > margin-le= > ft: 0px; ">SIRAJ, why are we depending on a facility that did not > com= > plete an ARC review?
right= > : 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; min-height: 14px; > ">
= >
bottom= > : 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">If an ARC review was too much trouble > for = > the Service Tags team, what does that say about depending on such > a f= > acility?
margi= > n-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; min-height: 14px; ">
DIV>
tyle=3D"margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; > margi= > n-left: 0px; ">Lloyd
right= > : 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; min-height: 14px; > ">
= >
bottom= > : 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">On Jun 15, 2007, at 4:11 AM, James > Carlson= > wrote:
margin= > -bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; min-height: 14px; ">
> QUOTE type=3D"cite">
0px;= > margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">Lloyd L. Chambers > writes: IV>
margin-r= > ight: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; "> class=3D"App= > le-converted-space">=A0 =A0 This project introduces > support fo= > r Service Tags in Glassfish, using the
top:= > 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; > "> N class=3D"Apple-converted-space">=A0 =A0 Service Tag > Registry= > client. Service Tag Registry is a local repository containing DIV><= > DIV style=3D"margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: > 0px; = > margin-left: 0px; ">=A0 =A0 > PAN>a list of product instances installed on a system. Refer to > ARC c= > ase
bot= > tom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; "> space">= > =A0 =A0 PSARC/2006/683/ for details of the Service Tags > projec= > t. With this support built
margin= > -right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; "> class=3D"A= > pple-converted-space">=A0 =A0 in, Glassfish installer will > reg= > ister Glassfish in the Service Tag Registry, during
=3D"margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; > margin-le= > ft: 0px; ">=A0 =A0 SPAN>insta= > llation.
rig= > ht: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; min-height: 14px; > "> R>
bott= > om: 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">Given that it's dependent on > 2006/683, t= > his project may have a bit of
mar= > gin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">a process > pro= > blem.=A0 The project > tea= > m for 2006/683 did not complete ARC
top: 0p= > x; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; > ">review = > and the product seems to have shipped without it.
=3D"margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; > margin-le= > ft: 0px; min-height: 14px; ">
0px;= > margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">-- > James C= > arlson, Solaris Networking space">=A0 = > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 < href=3D"mailto:james.d.carlson@= > sun.com">james.d.carlson@sun.com>
style=3D"margin-to= > p: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; > ">Su= > n Microsystems / 1 Network Drive space= > ">=A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 71.232W space= > ">=A0 Vox +1 781 442 2084
0px; = > margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">MS > UBUR02-= > 212 / Burlington MA 01803-2757 space">= > =A0 42.496N =A0 SPAN>F= > ax +1 781 442 1677
0px; = > margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; min- > height: = > 14px; ">
margin= > -right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; min-height: > 14px; = > ">

> > --Boundary_(ID_UAYIh4wcDd3D1P4TjZ86oQ)-- > From sacadmin Fri Jun 15 14:46:33 2007 Received: from sfbaymail2sca.sfbay.sun.com (sfbaymail2sca.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.145.155.42]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l5FLkXoe007110 for ; Fri, 15 Jun 2007 14:46:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from brmea-mail-2.sun.com (brmea-mail-2.Sun.COM [192.18.98.43]) by sfbaymail2sca.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.6+Sun/8.12.10/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l5FLj0Ue021138 for ; Fri, 15 Jun 2007 14:45:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dm-usca19-13.red.iplanet.com (host-179-56-18-192.iplanet.com [192.18.56.179] (may be forged)) by brmea-mail-2.sun.com (8.13.6+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id l5FLixAm028191; Fri, 15 Jun 2007 21:44:59 GMT Received: from aha.red.iplanet.com (aha [192.18.122.65]) by dm-usca19-13.red.iplanet.com (8.11.7p1+Sun/8.11.7/IPLANET,v1.2) with ESMTP id l5FLixW23303; Fri, 15 Jun 2007 14:44:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from aha.red.iplanet.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by aha.red.iplanet.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.13.7) with ESMTP id l5FLix1X018964; Fri, 15 Jun 2007 14:44:59 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <200706152144.l5FLix1X018964@aha.red.iplanet.com> To: Lloyd L Chambers Cc: WSARC@sac.sfbay.sun.com, Siraj Ghaffar From: Chris Kasso Reply-to: Chris Kasso In-reply-to: Lloyd L Chambers 's message of Fri, 15 Jun 2007 13:14:04 PDT. Subject: Re: WSARC/2007/351 FastTrack GlassFish Service tags Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2007 14:44:59 -0700 Status: RO Content-Length: 22570 I reread the standard wording I suggested we use and I realize the error here is that the ST project has already been delivered (without approval). So indicating this project can not be delivered before the other project doesn't really express the true nature of the problem. (It implicitly assumes the other case would never be delivered without first getting ARC approval) We could modifiy the wording to: The project depends on the following other project and may not be delivered before PSARC/2006/683 Service Tag is approved. Now in theory when the GF PAC is reviewing their release criteria it should be identified to them that while all the GF ARC cases have been approved the above condition was established by the ARC. The PAC will either realize the significant risk this creates for the project and thus apply pressure to the ST folks to have their case approved so as GF can ship *or* the PAC will ignore the condition because there is perceived pressure to get ST support out and they'll note that the Solaris PAC granted a waiver to bring ST support into S10 U4. Our job is to point out when these conditions exist so that bad things don't happen but we very much depend on management to behave in a responsible way. They have to evaluate the risks vs the need to ship product. Our job also tends to be to fix problems created by their choices. Chris From: Lloyd L Chambers Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2007 13:14:04 -0700 Chris (and WSARC), Siraj has suggested modifying the language to read: "The project depends on the following other project and may not be delivered before it: PSARC/2006/683 Service Tag" I'll modify the one-pager that way. HOWEVER, I think it's a non-solution, because in theory it means GlassFish can't ship until the PSARC case is approved. From what I understand from from Pat Ryan (below), the case has been *exempted* and *will not* be approved. How does a language change alter the reality other than as a feel good solution? I think it undermines the value and authority of the ARC process to *pretend* that things are kosher. Better to approve it and explicitly state the problem as part of the approval. Lloyd On Jun 15, 2007, at 9:42 AM, Chris Kasso wrote: >> Additionally we are working with 14 other engagements with over 60 >> products >> to be released in the next two quarters. > > This only reinforces the need for 2006/683 to get approval. If there > are problems with 2006/683 they are only going to be magnified as > these other 60 products are shipped with dependencies on 2006/683. > > I think this case can move forward but it needs the standard text: > >> The project depends on the following other project and may >> not be delivered before it... > > Chris > > From: Lloyd L Chambers > Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2007 09:29:08 -0700 > > [forwarding so it is seen by WSARC members, and goes into the > mail log] > > Begin forwarded message: > > From: Pat Ryan > Date: June 15, 2007 9:26:01 AM PDT > To: Siraj Ghaffar > Cc: Brandon E Taylor , Lloyd L Chambers > , Abhijit Kumar > Subject: Re: [Fwd: Re: GlassFish V2 Service Tag Support [WSARC/ > 2007/351 FastTrack timeout 06/21/2007]] > > Siraj, > > Service Tags started the ARC process and met with PSARC two times > (2006/683). Service Tags were then exempted from ARC Approval > requirements by the Solaris PTeam and PAC. At that time, PSARC > requested that SysNet file an umbrella case providing an overview of > the entire Sun Connection product from SysNet including the Service > Tag case. The one pager has been submitted - 2007/330. > > At this time Service Tags 1.0 are integrated into Solaris 10U4 and > ILOM2. Both of which will release in July. Additionally we are > working with 14 other engagements with over 60 products to be > released in the next two quarters. Attached is a presentation from > SysNet's VP that shows the committments made by product teams to > integrate with Service Tags. 50% of Sun's revenue products will > have Service Tags 1.0 integrated by the end of FY'07. > > Regards, > Pat > > > Siraj Ghaffar wrote: >> Hi Pat, Brandon, >> Has the Service Tag project not gone through the ARC process? We >> have issues going through WSARC as the Glassfish support for >> Service Tags depends on the Service Tags project. >> >> Thanks >> >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> - >> -- >> >> Subject: >> Re: GlassFish V2 Service Tag Support [WSARC/2007/351 FastTrack >> timeout 06/21/2007] >> From: >> Lloyd L Chambers >> Date: >> Fri, 15 Jun 2007 08:49:54 -0700 >> To: >> James Carlson , Siraj Ghaffar >> >> >> To: >> James Carlson , Siraj Ghaffar >> >> CC: >> WSARC@sac.sfbay.sun.com >> >> >> James, >> >> Thank you. >> >> SIRAJ, why are we depending on a facility that did not complete an >> ARC review? >> >> If an ARC review was too much trouble for the Service Tags team, >> what does that say about depending on such a facility? >> >> Lloyd >> >> On Jun 15, 2007, at 4:11 AM, James Carlson wrote: >> >>> Lloyd L. Chambers writes: >>>> This project introduces support for Service Tags in >>>> Glassfish, using the >>>> Service Tag Registry client. Service Tag Registry is a local >>>> repository containing >>>> a list of product instances installed on a system. Refer to >>>> ARC case >>>> PSARC/2006/683/ for details of the Service Tags project. With >>>> this support built >>>> in, Glassfish installer will register Glassfish in the >>>> Service Tag Registry, during >>>> installation. >>> >>> Given that it's dependent on 2006/683, this project may have a >>> bit of >>> a process problem. The project team for 2006/683 did not complete >>> ARC >>> review and the product seems to have shipped without it. >>> >>> --James Carlson, Solaris Networking >>> >>> Sun Microsystems / 1 Network Drive 71.232W Vox +1 781 >>> 442 2084 >>> MS UBUR02-212 / Burlington MA 01803-2757 42.496N Fax +1 781 >>> 442 1677 >> > > > > --Boundary_(ID_UAYIh4wcDd3D1P4TjZ86oQ) > Content-type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 > Content-transfer-encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE > > space; = > -khtml-line-break: after-white-space; ">[forwarding so it is seen > by = > WSARC members, and goes into the mail log]

Begin > for= > warded message:

sty= > le=3D"margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; > margin-= > left: 0px; "> color=3D"#000000" st= > yle=3D"font: 12.0px Helvetica; color: #000000">From: FONT> ONT face=3D"Helvetica" size=3D"3" style=3D"font: 12.0px > Helvetica">Pa= > t Ryan <Pat.Ryan@Sun.COM A>&g= > t;
marg= > in-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; "> =3D"3" color=3D"#000000" style=3D"font: 12.0px Helvetica; color: > #000= > 000">Date: =3D"font: 12.0px Helvetica">June 15, 2007 9:26:01 AM PDT DIV>= >
0px; ma= > rgin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; "> =3D"Helvetica" size=3D"3" color=3D"#000000" style=3D"font: 12.0px > Hel= > vetica; color: #000000">Cc: face=3D"Helvetica" si= > ze=3D"3" style=3D"font: 12.0px Helvetica">Brandon E Taylor < hre= > f=3D"mailto:Brandon.Taylor@Sun.COM">Brandon.Taylor@Sun.COM A>>, L= > loyd L Chambers < href=3D"mailto:Lloyd.Chambers@Sun.COM">Lloyd.C= > hambers@Sun.COM>, Abhijit Kumar < href=3D"mailto:Abhijit.= > Kumar@Sun.COM">Abhijit.Kumar@Sun.COM>
=3D"margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; > margin-le= > ft: 0px; "> styl= > e=3D"font: 12.0px Helvetica; color: #000000">Subject: FONT><= > FONT face=3D"Helvetica" size=3D"3" style=3D"font: 12.0px > Helvetica"><= > B>Re: [Fwd: Re: GlassFish V2 Service Tag Support [WSARC/2007/351 > Fast= > Track timeout 06/21/2007]]
top: = > 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; min- > hei= > ght: 14px; ">
right: = > 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">Siraj,
=3D"margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; > margin-le= > ft: 0px; min-height: 14px; ">
0px;= > margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; > ">Service T= > ags started the ARC process and met with PSARC two times > (2006/683).<= > SPAN class=3D"Apple-converted-space">=A0 Service Tags were > the= > n exempted from ARC Approval requirements by the Solaris PTeam > and PA= > C.=A0 At that > time, class=3D"Apple-converted-space">=A0 PSARC requested that > SysN= > et file an umbrella case providing an overview of the entire Sun > Conn= > ection product from SysNet including the Service Tag case. class= > =3D"Apple-converted-space">=A0 =A0 The one pager has been > subm= > itted - 2007/330.
right: 0= > px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; min-height: 14px; > ">
IV>
bottom: 0= > px; margin-left: 0px; ">At this time Service Tags 1.0 are > integrated = > into Solaris 10U4 and ILOM2.= > =A0 Both of which will release in July. class=3D"Apple-co= > nverted-space">=A0 Additionally we are working with 14 > other e= > ngagements with over 60 products to be released in the next two > quart= > ers.=A0 Attached is > a pr= > esentation from SysNet's VP that shows converted-= > space">=A0 the committments made by product teams to > integrate= > with Service Tags. =A0 SPAN>= > 50% of Sun's revenue products will have Service Tags 1.0 > integrated b= > y the end of FY'07.
right:= > 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; min-height: 14px; > ">
<= > /DIV>
bottom:= > 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">Regards,
0px= > ; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">Pat DIV= >>
; margin-left: 0px; min-height: 14px; ">
style=3D"margi= > n-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: > 0px; = > min-height: 14px; ">
margin-r= > ight: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">Siraj Ghaffar > wrot= > e:
mar= > gin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">Hi Pat, > Brand= > on,
bot= > tom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">Has the Service Tag project not > gone th= > rough the ARC process? We have issues going through WSARC as the > Glas= > sfish support for Service Tags depends on the Service Tags > project. DIV>
bottom: = > 0px; margin-left: 0px; min-height: 14px; ">
style=3D"ma= > rgin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin- > left: 0p= > x; ">Thanks
0px; ma= > rgin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; min-height: 14px; ">
DIV> V style=3D"margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: > 0px; ma= > rgin-left: 0px; min-height: 14px; ">
style=3D"margin-to= > p: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; > ">--= > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------= > -
botto= > m: 0px; margin-left: 0px; min-height: 14px; ">
=3D"margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; > margin-le= > ft: 0px; ">Subject:
right:= > 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">Re: GlassFish V2 > Servic= > e Tag Support [WSARC/2007/351 FastTrack timeout 06/21/2007] DIV> style=3D"margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; > mar= > gin-left: 0px; ">From:
rig= > ht: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">Lloyd L Chambers > <= > ; href=3D"mailto:Lloyd.Chambers@Sun.COM">Lloyd.Chambers@Sun.COM= > >
margin-bo= > ttom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">Date:
top: 0= > px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; > ">Fri, 1= > 5 Jun 2007 08:49:54 -0700
margin-= > right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">To:
sty= > le=3D"margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; > margin-= > left: 0px; ">James Carlson < href=3D"mailto:James.D.Carlson@Sun.= > COM">James.D.Carlson@Sun.COM>, Siraj Ghaffar < href=3D"ma= > ilto:Siraj.Ghaffar@Sun.COM">Siraj.Ghaffar@Sun.COM> DIV>
tyle=3D"margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; > margi= > n-left: 0px; min-height: 14px; ">
top: = > 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; > ">To: DIV>
bottom: = > 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">James Carlson < href=3D"mailto:James.D.= > Carlson@Sun.COM">James.D.Carlson@Sun.COM>, Siraj Ghaffar > <<= > A href=3D"mailto:Siraj.Ghaffar@Sun.COM">Siraj.Ghaffar@Sun.COM A>>= >
bottom= > : 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">CC:
0px; ma= > rgin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; "> href=3D"m= > ailto:WSARC@sac.sfbay.sun.com">WSARC@sac.sfbay.sun.com DIV>
style=3D"margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; > marg= > in-left: 0px; min-height: 14px; ">
top:= > 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; > min-he= > ight: 14px; ">
right: = > 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">James,
=3D"margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; > margin-le= > ft: 0px; min-height: 14px; ">
0px;= > margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">Thank > you= > .
botto= > m: 0px; margin-left: 0px; min-height: 14px; ">
=3D"margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; > margin-le= > ft: 0px; ">SIRAJ, why are we depending on a facility that did not > com= > plete an ARC review?
right= > : 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; min-height: 14px; > ">
= >
bottom= > : 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">If an ARC review was too much trouble > for = > the Service Tags team, what does that say about depending on such > a f= > acility?
margi= > n-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; min-height: 14px; ">
DIV>
tyle=3D"margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; > margi= > n-left: 0px; ">Lloyd
right= > : 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; min-height: 14px; > ">
= >
bottom= > : 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">On Jun 15, 2007, at 4:11 AM, James > Carlson= > wrote:
margin= > -bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; min-height: 14px; ">
> QUOTE type=3D"cite">
0px;= > margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">Lloyd L. Chambers > writes: IV>
margin-r= > ight: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; "> class=3D"App= > le-converted-space">=A0 =A0 This project introduces > support fo= > r Service Tags in Glassfish, using the
top:= > 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; > "> N class=3D"Apple-converted-space">=A0 =A0 Service Tag > Registry= > client. Service Tag Registry is a local repository containing DIV><= > DIV style=3D"margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: > 0px; = > margin-left: 0px; ">=A0 =A0 > PAN>a list of product instances installed on a system. Refer to > ARC c= > ase
bot= > tom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; "> space">= > =A0 =A0 PSARC/2006/683/ for details of the Service Tags > projec= > t. With this support built
margin= > -right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; "> class=3D"A= > pple-converted-space">=A0 =A0 in, Glassfish installer will > reg= > ister Glassfish in the Service Tag Registry, during
=3D"margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; > margin-le= > ft: 0px; ">=A0 =A0 SPAN>insta= > llation.
rig= > ht: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; min-height: 14px; > "> R>
bott= > om: 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">Given that it's dependent on > 2006/683, t= > his project may have a bit of
mar= > gin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">a process > pro= > blem.=A0 The project > tea= > m for 2006/683 did not complete ARC
top: 0p= > x; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; > ">review = > and the product seems to have shipped without it.
=3D"margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; > margin-le= > ft: 0px; min-height: 14px; ">
0px;= > margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">-- > James C= > arlson, Solaris Networking space">=A0 = > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 < href=3D"mailto:james.d.carlson@= > sun.com">james.d.carlson@sun.com>
style=3D"margin-to= > p: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; > ">Su= > n Microsystems / 1 Network Drive space= > ">=A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 71.232W space= > ">=A0 Vox +1 781 442 2084
0px; = > margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">MS > UBUR02-= > 212 / Burlington MA 01803-2757 space">= > =A0 42.496N =A0 SPAN>F= > ax +1 781 442 1677
0px; = > margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; min- > height: = > 14px; ">
margin= > -right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; min-height: > 14px; = > ">

> > --Boundary_(ID_UAYIh4wcDd3D1P4TjZ86oQ)-- > From sacadmin Fri Jun 15 15:06:47 2007 Received: from sfbaymail1sca.SFBay.Sun.COM (sfbaymail1sca.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.145.154.35]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l5FM6l3T009566; Fri, 15 Jun 2007 15:06:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sca-es-mail-1.sun.com (sca-es-mail-1.Sun.COM [192.18.43.132]) by sfbaymail1sca.SFBay.Sun.COM (8.13.6+Sun/8.13.6/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l5FM5EVL014303; Fri, 15 Jun 2007 15:05:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from fe-sfbay-09.sun.com ([192.18.43.129]) by sca-es-mail-1.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id l5FM59sj024010; Fri, 15 Jun 2007 15:05:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from conversion-daemon.fe-sfbay-09.sun.com by fe-sfbay-09.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-8.04 (built Feb 28 2007)) id <0JJP00N016IQ0A00@fe-sfbay-09.sun.com> (original mail from edh@sun.com) ; Fri, 15 Jun 2007 15:05:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [129.146.72.132] by fe-sfbay-09.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-8.04 (built Feb 28 2007)) with ESMTPSA id <0JJP00GN86OKYFC0@fe-sfbay-09.sun.com>; Fri, 15 Jun 2007 15:05:09 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2007 15:03:47 -0700 From: Edward Hunter Subject: Re: GlassFish V2 Service Tag Support [WSARC/2007/351 FastTrack timeout 06/21/2007] In-reply-to: <200706150143.l5F1h3re012089@sac.sfbay.sun.com> Sender: Ed.Hunter@sun.com To: "Lloyd L. Chambers" Cc: WSARC@sac.sfbay.sun.com, Siraj.Ghaffar@sun.com Message-id: <46730CC3.1000008@sun.com> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT References: <200706150143.l5F1h3re012089@sac.sfbay.sun.com> User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.0 (X11/20070424) Status: RO Content-Length: 5918 Is this separate from the JES MF case that we approved? Meaning will we see a fasttrack (or something) that connects Glassfish with the JES version of service tags? -edh Lloyd L. Chambers wrote: > Template Version: @(#)sac_nextcase 1.63 06/14/07 SMI > This information is Copyright 2007 Sun Microsystems > 1. Introduction > 1.1. Project/Component Working Name: > GlassFish V2 Service Tag Support > 1.2. Name of Document Author/Supplier: > Author: Siraj Ghaffar > 1.3 Date of This Document: > 14 June, 2007 > 4. Technical Description > > 1. Introduction > 1.1. Project/Component Working Name: > Service Tags Support for Glassfish v2/Sun Java System Application Server 9.1 > > 1.2. Name(s) and e-mail address of Document Author(s)/Supplier: > Siraj Ghaffar : Siraj.Ghaffar@Sun.Com > > 1.3. Date of This Document: June 14, 2007 > > > 2. Project Summary > 2.1. Project Description: > > This project introduces support for Service Tags in Glassfish, using the > Service Tag Registry client. Service Tag Registry is a local repository containing > a list of product instances installed on a system. Refer to ARC case > PSARC/2006/683/ for details of the Service Tags project. With this support built > in, Glassfish installer will register Glassfish in the Service Tag Registry, during > installation. > > Service Tags are eventually retrieved and sent to Sun for various business > purposes. Refer to Section 1.2 of the Service Tags functional specification at > http://sac.sfbay/PSARC/2006/683/commitment.materials/ST_ARC_v4.pdf > for details on business motivations for collecting this data. > > 2.2. Risks and Assumptions: > The project depends on timely delivery of the Service Tag Registry tool, > "stclient", and its associated components. The tool is expected to be > available in Solaris 10 Update 4. > > > 3. Problem Summary > 3.1. Problem Area: > > Sun cannot measure its install base of products. This applies to Glassfish as > well. Glassfish support for Service Tags enables querying mechanisms to discover > Glassfish installations. > > Refer to Section 1.2 of the Service Tags functional specification at > http://sac.sfbay/PSARC/2006/683/commitment.materials/ST_ARC_v4.pdf > for a description of goals and objectives. The description applies to Glassfish, > as it does to other Sun products. > > > 3.2. Justification: > Service Tag support is a required feature of Glassfish > > > 4. Technical Description: > 4.1. Details: > > Service Tag Registry is a local repository containing a list of product > instances installed on the system. This project introduces support for Glassfish > registration in the Service Tag Registry, using the command line interface, > "stclient". This interface is part of the Service Tag project and will be > available with Solaris 10 update 4. Other platforms are likely to be supported > later. > > The stclient tool requires product identification from Project SwordFish > (http://metadata.central.sun.com). A product ID has already been obtained for > Glassfish. This project adds a new script, "servicetag_wrapper" to Glassfish. This > script will call the stclient tool with Glassfish specific parameters. The > Glassfish installer will invoke "servicetag_wrapper" during installation. The user > will be able to invoke "servicetag_wrapper", when upgrading to Solaris 10 update 4 > (or later) after GlassFish has been installed. > > Refer to Section 2 of Service Tag Functional spec at > http://sac.sfbay/PSARC/2006/683/commitment.materials/ST_ARC_v4.pdf > for architecture and technical details of the Service Tags Project. > > 4.2. Bug/RFE Number(s): > None > > 4.3. In Scope: > The mechanism to add and delete the service tag registry entry for Glassfish (outside JES) > > 4.4. Out of Scope: > Mechanisms to query the service tag registry entry from the client machine > and send information back to Sun. > > 4.5. Interfaces: > > 4.5.1 Exported Interfaces > > Interface: Registration script (servicetag_wrapper) > Stability: unstable > Comments:Referred in section 4.1, 4.6 > > > 4.5.2 Imported interfaces > > Interface: ST CLI (stclient) > Stability: Stable > Exporting Project: Sun Service Tag ARC Case PSARC/2006/683 > Comments: Referred in section 2.2, 4.1 > > > 4.6. Doc Impact: > Documentation on how to invoke the "servicetag_wrapper" script. > > 4.7. Admin/Config Impact: > None. > > 4.8. HA Impact: > None. > > 4.9. I18N/L10N Impact: > None. > > 4.10. Packaging & Delivery: > This will be part of the Glassfish installer code. This feature is not available > on GlassFish jar distribution available from java.net. It will be available in > Sun branded distributions. > > 4.11. Security Impact: > None > > 4.12. Compatibility Impact > None > > 4.13. Dependencies: > Depends on delivery of Service Tag Registry command line interface, "stclient" > and its associated components in a timely fashion. It is expected that the > interface will be available in Solaris 10 Update 4. > > 5. Reference Documents: > > Service Tag ARC Case : PSARC/2006/683/ > > Service Tags Functional Spec : > http://sac.sfbay/PSARC/2006/683/commitment.materials/ST_ARC_v4.pdf > > stclient CLI : > http://sac.sfbay/PSARC/2006/683/commitment.materials/stclient.pdf > > Umbrella case for Sun Java System Application Server 9.0(includes Glassfish > installer): WSARC/2005/229/ > > > 6. Schedule: > 6.1. Projected Availability: > June 2007 > > > 6. Resources and Schedule > 6.4. Steering Committee requested information > 6.4.1. Consolidation C-team Name: > GlassFish > 6.5. ARC review type: FastTrack > 6.6. ARC Exposure: open > > From sacadmin Fri Jun 15 15:22:52 2007 Received: from sfbaymail1sca.SFBay.Sun.COM (sfbaymail1sca.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.145.154.35]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l5FMMqqf010372 for ; Fri, 15 Jun 2007 15:22:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sca-es-mail-2.sun.com (sca-es-mail-2.Sun.COM [192.18.43.133]) by sfbaymail1sca.SFBay.Sun.COM (8.13.6+Sun/8.13.6/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l5FMLI9I021345 for ; Fri, 15 Jun 2007 15:21:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from fe-sfbay-10.sun.com ([192.18.43.129]) by sca-es-mail-2.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id l5FMLDHW024578 for ; Fri, 15 Jun 2007 15:21:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from conversion-daemon.fe-sfbay-10.sun.com by fe-sfbay-10.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-8.04 (built Feb 28 2007)) id <0JJP006017E3AU00@fe-sfbay-10.sun.com> (original mail from edh@sun.com) for WSARC@sac.sfbay.sun.com; Fri, 15 Jun 2007 15:21:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [129.146.72.132] by fe-sfbay-10.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-8.04 (built Feb 28 2007)) with ESMTPSA id <0JJP008HW7FCCO80@fe-sfbay-10.sun.com>; Fri, 15 Jun 2007 15:21:13 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2007 15:19:51 -0700 From: Edward Hunter Subject: Re: WSARC/2007/351 FastTrack GlassFish Service tags In-reply-to: <200706152144.l5FLix1X018964@aha.red.iplanet.com> Sender: Ed.Hunter@sun.com To: Chris Kasso Cc: Lloyd L Chambers , WSARC@sac.sfbay.sun.com, Siraj Ghaffar , Tim Marsland , Robert Brewin Message-id: <46731087.6040808@sun.com> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT References: <200706152144.l5FLix1X018964@aha.red.iplanet.com> User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.0 (X11/20070424) Status: RO Content-Length: 26200 Granted we can't be sure, given that the PSARC case did not complete, whether or not there are other issues lurking. However, the main bone of contention was around secure by default. ST wanted to not be held to that security policy. The ARC objected. Management decided that the policy did not apply in this case. Rather than let the case complete with that caveat they just waived the whole process. (I'm probably leaving out a bunch of detail here.) Now, the thing we're dealing with here is a fasttrack. So, unless someone wants to derail it the question we're trying to cover is is the consuming of these interfaces from this other case (PSARC/2006/683) a small enough change not to warrant a full review. My sense is modulo the fact that a full review might turn up things on the PSARC side that what they are consuming is probably okay. From a process perspective one way to handle this is to assert that since the interfaces are not "approved" they are therefore private and require a contract. That stays within the process boundaries and does not create a bunch of weird artifacts while we try to explain this. So, if I were going to modify this fasttrack that's what I would do. Glassfish needs either a contract or some assurance that ST will let them know before things change. That's actually a reasonable request since there is no indication based on the management decision that ST will ever come back to the ARC. Since they would then have to complete their first case. Since the contract is meant to force them to consider their consumers that would probably be a good thing given the current state. I'm less concerned about the form of the contract although having one in the case directory would be good. I'm more concerned with the intent in that both parties understand this connection exists and needs to be managed. An observation on Pat's response to the initial question. One way to view that is that the ST team has basically taken on the responsibility of the ARC process since they have chosen to manage the expectations of the 60 products they are dealing with in terms of the interfaces they provide. Otherwise, there is a big chance for things to go wrong here. Essentially, they are creating contracts with all the consumers of ST and managing those. On the one hand that's good. On the other hand it would be good to know that they explicitly signed up for that and understand the implications. -edh Chris Kasso wrote: > I reread the standard wording I suggested we use and I realize the > error here is that the ST project has already been delivered (without > approval). So indicating this project can not be delivered before > the other project doesn't really express the true nature of the problem. > (It implicitly assumes the other case would never be delivered without > first getting ARC approval) > > We could modifiy the wording to: > > The project depends on the following other project and may not be > delivered before PSARC/2006/683 Service Tag is approved. > > Now in theory when the GF PAC is reviewing their release criteria it > should be identified to them that while all the GF ARC cases have > been approved the above condition was established by the ARC. > > The PAC will either realize the significant risk this creates for the > project and thus apply pressure to the ST folks to have their case > approved so as GF can ship *or* the PAC will ignore the condition > because there is perceived pressure to get ST support out and they'll > note that the Solaris PAC granted a waiver to bring ST support into > S10 U4. > > Our job is to point out when these conditions exist so that bad things > don't happen but we very much depend on management to behave in > a responsible way. They have to evaluate the risks vs the need to > ship product. Our job also tends to be to fix problems created > by their choices. > > Chris > > From: Lloyd L Chambers > Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2007 13:14:04 -0700 > > Chris (and WSARC), > > Siraj has suggested modifying the language to read: > > "The project depends on the following other project and may not be > delivered before it: PSARC/2006/683 Service Tag" > > I'll modify the one-pager that way. > > HOWEVER, I think it's a non-solution, because in theory it means > GlassFish can't ship until the PSARC case is approved. From what I > understand from from Pat Ryan (below), the case has been *exempted* > and *will not* be approved. > > How does a language change alter the reality other than as a feel > good solution? I think it undermines the value and authority of the > ARC process to *pretend* that things are kosher. Better to approve > it and explicitly state the problem as part of the approval. > > Lloyd > > On Jun 15, 2007, at 9:42 AM, Chris Kasso wrote: > > >> Additionally we are working with 14 other engagements with over 60 > >> products > >> to be released in the next two quarters. > > > > This only reinforces the need for 2006/683 to get approval. If there > > are problems with 2006/683 they are only going to be magnified as > > these other 60 products are shipped with dependencies on 2006/683. > > > > I think this case can move forward but it needs the standard text: > > > >> The project depends on the following other project and may > >> not be delivered before it... > > > > Chris > > > > From: Lloyd L Chambers > > Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2007 09:29:08 -0700 > > > > [forwarding so it is seen by WSARC members, and goes into the > > mail log] > > > > Begin forwarded message: > > > > From: Pat Ryan > > Date: June 15, 2007 9:26:01 AM PDT > > To: Siraj Ghaffar > > Cc: Brandon E Taylor , Lloyd L Chambers > > , Abhijit Kumar > > Subject: Re: [Fwd: Re: GlassFish V2 Service Tag Support [WSARC/ > > 2007/351 FastTrack timeout 06/21/2007]] > > > > Siraj, > > > > Service Tags started the ARC process and met with PSARC two times > > (2006/683). Service Tags were then exempted from ARC Approval > > requirements by the Solaris PTeam and PAC. At that time, PSARC > > requested that SysNet file an umbrella case providing an overview of > > the entire Sun Connection product from SysNet including the Service > > Tag case. The one pager has been submitted - 2007/330. > > > > At this time Service Tags 1.0 are integrated into Solaris 10U4 and > > ILOM2. Both of which will release in July. Additionally we are > > working with 14 other engagements with over 60 products to be > > released in the next two quarters. Attached is a presentation from > > SysNet's VP that shows the committments made by product teams to > > integrate with Service Tags. 50% of Sun's revenue products will > > have Service Tags 1.0 integrated by the end of FY'07. > > > > Regards, > > Pat > > > > > > Siraj Ghaffar wrote: > >> Hi Pat, Brandon, > >> Has the Service Tag project not gone through the ARC process? We > >> have issues going through WSARC as the Glassfish support for > >> Service Tags depends on the Service Tags project. > >> > >> Thanks > >> > >> > >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> - > >> -- > >> > >> Subject: > >> Re: GlassFish V2 Service Tag Support [WSARC/2007/351 FastTrack > >> timeout 06/21/2007] > >> From: > >> Lloyd L Chambers > >> Date: > >> Fri, 15 Jun 2007 08:49:54 -0700 > >> To: > >> James Carlson , Siraj Ghaffar > >> > >> > >> To: > >> James Carlson , Siraj Ghaffar > >> > >> CC: > >> WSARC@sac.sfbay.sun.com > >> > >> > >> James, > >> > >> Thank you. > >> > >> SIRAJ, why are we depending on a facility that did not complete an > >> ARC review? > >> > >> If an ARC review was too much trouble for the Service Tags team, > >> what does that say about depending on such a facility? > >> > >> Lloyd > >> > >> On Jun 15, 2007, at 4:11 AM, James Carlson wrote: > >> > >>> Lloyd L. Chambers writes: > >>>> This project introduces support for Service Tags in > >>>> Glassfish, using the > >>>> Service Tag Registry client. Service Tag Registry is a local > >>>> repository containing > >>>> a list of product instances installed on a system. Refer to > >>>> ARC case > >>>> PSARC/2006/683/ for details of the Service Tags project. With > >>>> this support built > >>>> in, Glassfish installer will register Glassfish in the > >>>> Service Tag Registry, during > >>>> installation. > >>> > >>> Given that it's dependent on 2006/683, this project may have a > >>> bit of > >>> a process problem. The project team for 2006/683 did not complete > >>> ARC > >>> review and the product seems to have shipped without it. > >>> > >>> --James Carlson, Solaris Networking > >>> > >>> Sun Microsystems / 1 Network Drive 71.232W Vox +1 781 > >>> 442 2084 > >>> MS UBUR02-212 / Burlington MA 01803-2757 42.496N Fax +1 781 > >>> 442 1677 > >> > > > > > > > > --Boundary_(ID_UAYIh4wcDd3D1P4TjZ86oQ) > > Content-type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 > > Content-transfer-encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE > > > > > space; = > > -khtml-line-break: after-white-space; ">[forwarding so it is seen > > by = > > WSARC members, and goes into the mail log]

Begin > > for= > > warded message:

> sty= > > le=3D"margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; > > margin-= > > left: 0px; "> > color=3D"#000000" st= > > yle=3D"font: 12.0px Helvetica; color: #000000">From: > FONT> > ONT face=3D"Helvetica" size=3D"3" style=3D"font: 12.0px > > Helvetica">Pa= > > t Ryan <Pat.Ryan@Sun.COM > A>&g= > > t;
> marg= > > in-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; "> > =3D"3" color=3D"#000000" style=3D"font: 12.0px Helvetica; color: > > #000= > > 000">Date: > =3D"font: 12.0px Helvetica">June 15, 2007 9:26:01 AM PDT > DIV>= > >
> 0px; ma= > > rgin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; "> > =3D"Helvetica" size=3D"3" color=3D"#000000" style=3D"font: 12.0px > > Hel= > > vetica; color: #000000">Cc: > face=3D"Helvetica" si= > > ze=3D"3" style=3D"font: 12.0px Helvetica">Brandon E Taylor < > hre= > > f=3D"mailto:Brandon.Taylor@Sun.COM">Brandon.Taylor@Sun.COM > A>>, L= > > loyd L Chambers < > href=3D"mailto:Lloyd.Chambers@Sun.COM">Lloyd.C= > > hambers@Sun.COM>, Abhijit Kumar < > href=3D"mailto:Abhijit.= > > Kumar@Sun.COM">Abhijit.Kumar@Sun.COM>
> =3D"margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; > > margin-le= > > ft: 0px; "> > styl= > > e=3D"font: 12.0px Helvetica; color: #000000">Subject: > FONT><= > > FONT face=3D"Helvetica" size=3D"3" style=3D"font: 12.0px > > Helvetica"><= > > B>Re: [Fwd: Re: GlassFish V2 Service Tag Support [WSARC/2007/351 > > Fast= > > Track timeout 06/21/2007]]
> top: = > > 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; min- > > hei= > > ght: 14px; ">
> right: = > > 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">Siraj,
> =3D"margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; > > margin-le= > > ft: 0px; min-height: 14px; ">
> 0px;= > > margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; > > ">Service T= > > ags started the ARC process and met with PSARC two times > > (2006/683).<= > > SPAN class=3D"Apple-converted-space">=A0 Service Tags were > > the= > > n exempted from ARC Approval requirements by the Solaris PTeam > > and PA= > > C.=A0 At that > > time, > class=3D"Apple-converted-space">=A0 PSARC requested that > > SysN= > > et file an umbrella case providing an overview of the entire Sun > > Conn= > > ection product from SysNet including the Service Tag case. > class= > > =3D"Apple-converted-space">=A0 =A0 The one pager has been > > subm= > > itted - 2007/330.
> right: 0= > > px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; min-height: 14px; > > ">
> IV>
> bottom: 0= > > px; margin-left: 0px; ">At this time Service Tags 1.0 are > > integrated = > > into Solaris 10U4 and ILOM2.= > > =A0 Both of which will release in July. > class=3D"Apple-co= > > nverted-space">=A0 Additionally we are working with 14 > > other e= > > ngagements with over 60 products to be released in the next two > > quart= > > ers.=A0 Attached is > > a pr= > > esentation from SysNet's VP that shows > converted-= > > space">=A0 the committments made by product teams to > > integrate= > > with Service Tags. =A0 > SPAN>= > > 50% of Sun's revenue products will have Service Tags 1.0 > > integrated b= > > y the end of FY'07.
> right:= > > 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; min-height: 14px; > > ">
<= > > /DIV>
> bottom:= > > 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">Regards,
> 0px= > > ; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">Pat > DIV= > >>
> ; margin-left: 0px; min-height: 14px; ">
> style=3D"margi= > > n-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: > > 0px; = > > min-height: 14px; ">
> margin-r= > > ight: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">Siraj Ghaffar > > wrot= > > e:
> mar= > > gin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">Hi Pat, > > Brand= > > on,
> bot= > > tom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">Has the Service Tag project not > > gone th= > > rough the ARC process? We have issues going through WSARC as the > > Glas= > > sfish support for Service Tags depends on the Service Tags > > project. > DIV>
> bottom: = > > 0px; margin-left: 0px; min-height: 14px; ">
> style=3D"ma= > > rgin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin- > > left: 0p= > > x; ">Thanks
> 0px; ma= > > rgin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; min-height: 14px; ">
>> DIV>> > > V style=3D"margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: > > 0px; ma= > > rgin-left: 0px; min-height: 14px; ">
> style=3D"margin-to= > > p: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; > > ">--= > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------= > > -
> botto= > > m: 0px; margin-left: 0px; min-height: 14px; ">
> =3D"margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; > > margin-le= > > ft: 0px; ">Subject:
> right:= > > 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">Re: GlassFish V2 > > Servic= > > e Tag Support [WSARC/2007/351 FastTrack timeout 06/21/2007] > DIV> > style=3D"margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; > > mar= > > gin-left: 0px; ">From:
> rig= > > ht: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">Lloyd L Chambers > > <= > > ; > href=3D"mailto:Lloyd.Chambers@Sun.COM">Lloyd.Chambers@Sun.COM= > > >
> margin-bo= > > ttom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">Date:
> top: 0= > > px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; > > ">Fri, 1= > > 5 Jun 2007 08:49:54 -0700
> margin-= > > right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">To:
> sty= > > le=3D"margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; > > margin-= > > left: 0px; ">James Carlson < > href=3D"mailto:James.D.Carlson@Sun.= > > COM">James.D.Carlson@Sun.COM>, Siraj Ghaffar < > href=3D"ma= > > ilto:Siraj.Ghaffar@Sun.COM">Siraj.Ghaffar@Sun.COM> > DIV>
> tyle=3D"margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; > > margi= > > n-left: 0px; min-height: 14px; ">
> top: = > > 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; > > ">To: > DIV>
> bottom: = > > 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">James Carlson < > href=3D"mailto:James.D.= > > Carlson@Sun.COM">James.D.Carlson@Sun.COM>, Siraj Ghaffar > > <<= > > A href=3D"mailto:Siraj.Ghaffar@Sun.COM">Siraj.Ghaffar@Sun.COM > A>>= > >
> bottom= > > : 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">CC:
> 0px; ma= > > rgin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; "> > href=3D"m= > > ailto:WSARC@sac.sfbay.sun.com">WSARC@sac.sfbay.sun.com > DIV>
> style=3D"margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; > > marg= > > in-left: 0px; min-height: 14px; ">
> top:= > > 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; > > min-he= > > ight: 14px; ">
> right: = > > 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">James,
> =3D"margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; > > margin-le= > > ft: 0px; min-height: 14px; ">
> 0px;= > > margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">Thank > > you= > > .
> botto= > > m: 0px; margin-left: 0px; min-height: 14px; ">
> =3D"margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; > > margin-le= > > ft: 0px; ">SIRAJ, why are we depending on a facility that did not > > com= > > plete an ARC review?
> right= > > : 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; min-height: 14px; > > ">
= > >
> bottom= > > : 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">If an ARC review was too much trouble > > for = > > the Service Tags team, what does that say about depending on such > > a f= > > acility?
> margi= > > n-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; min-height: 14px; ">
> DIV>
> tyle=3D"margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; > > margi= > > n-left: 0px; ">Lloyd
> right= > > : 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; min-height: 14px; > > ">
= > >
> bottom= > > : 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">On Jun 15, 2007, at 4:11 AM, James > > Carlson= > > wrote:
> margin= > > -bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; min-height: 14px; ">
> > > QUOTE type=3D"cite">
> 0px;= > > margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">Lloyd L. Chambers > > writes: > IV>
> margin-r= > > ight: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; "> > class=3D"App= > > le-converted-space">=A0 =A0 This project introduces > > support fo= > > r Service Tags in Glassfish, using the
> top:= > > 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; > > "> > N class=3D"Apple-converted-space">=A0 =A0 Service Tag > > Registry= > > client. Service Tag Registry is a local repository containing > DIV><= > > DIV style=3D"margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: > > 0px; = > > margin-left: 0px; ">=A0 =A0 > > > PAN>a list of product instances installed on a system. Refer to > > ARC c= > > ase
> bot= > > tom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; "> > space">= > > =A0 =A0 PSARC/2006/683/ for details of the Service Tags > > projec= > > t. With this support built
> margin= > > -right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; "> > class=3D"A= > > pple-converted-space">=A0 =A0 in, Glassfish installer will > > reg= > > ister Glassfish in the Service Tag Registry, during
> =3D"margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; > > margin-le= > > ft: 0px; ">=A0 =A0 > SPAN>insta= > > llation.
> rig= > > ht: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; min-height: 14px; > > "> > R>
> bott= > > om: 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">Given that it's dependent on > > 2006/683, t= > > his project may have a bit of
> mar= > > gin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">a process > > pro= > > blem.=A0 The project > > tea= > > m for 2006/683 did not complete ARC
> top: 0p= > > x; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; > > ">review = > > and the product seems to have shipped without it.
> =3D"margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; > > margin-le= > > ft: 0px; min-height: 14px; ">
> 0px;= > > margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">-- > > James C= > > arlson, Solaris Networking > space">=A0 = > > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 < > href=3D"mailto:james.d.carlson@= > > sun.com">james.d.carlson@sun.com>
> style=3D"margin-to= > > p: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; > > ">Su= > > n Microsystems / 1 Network Drive > space= > > ">=A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 71.232W > space= > > ">=A0 Vox +1 781 442 2084
> 0px; = > > margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">MS > > UBUR02-= > > 212 / Burlington MA 01803-2757 > space">= > > =A0 42.496N =A0 > SPAN>F= > > ax +1 781 442 1677
> 0px; = > > margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; min- > > height: = > > 14px; ">
> margin= > > -right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; min-height: > > 14px; = > > ">

> > > > --Boundary_(ID_UAYIh4wcDd3D1P4TjZ86oQ)-- > > > > > From sacadmin Fri Jun 15 15:55:56 2007 Received: from sfbaymail2sca.sfbay.sun.com (sfbaymail2sca.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.145.155.42]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l5FMtt17011202 for ; Fri, 15 Jun 2007 15:55:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from brmea-mail-1.sun.com (brmea-mail-1.Sun.COM [192.18.98.31]) by sfbaymail2sca.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.6+Sun/8.12.10/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l5FMsMaj023615 for ; Fri, 15 Jun 2007 15:54:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dm-usca15-11.red.iplanet.com (host-185-56-18-192.iplanet.com [192.18.56.185] (may be forged)) by brmea-mail-1.sun.com (8.13.6+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id l5FMsLb5026039; Fri, 15 Jun 2007 22:54:21 GMT Received: from aha.red.iplanet.com (aha [192.18.122.65]) by dm-usca15-11.red.iplanet.com (8.11.7p1+Sun/8.11.7/IPLANET,v1.2) with ESMTP id l5FMsLh25722; Fri, 15 Jun 2007 15:54:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from aha.red.iplanet.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by aha.red.iplanet.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.13.7) with ESMTP id l5FMsLfN019372; Fri, 15 Jun 2007 15:54:21 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <200706152254.l5FMsLfN019372@aha.red.iplanet.com> To: Edward Hunter Cc: Lloyd L Chambers , WSARC@sac.sfbay.sun.com, Siraj Ghaffar , Tim Marsland , Robert Brewin From: Chris Kasso Reply-to: Chris Kasso In-reply-to: Edward Hunter 's message of Fri, 15 Jun 2007 15:19:51 PDT. Subject: Re: WSARC/2007/351 FastTrack GlassFish Service tags Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2007 15:54:21 -0700 Status: RO Content-Length: 29183 From: Edward Hunter Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2007 15:19:51 -0700 Granted we can't be sure, given that the PSARC case did not complete, whether or not there are other issues lurking. However, the main bone of contention was around secure by default. ST wanted to not be held to that security policy. The ARC objected. Management decided that the policy did not apply in this case. Rather than let the case complete with that caveat they just waived the whole process. (I'm probably leaving out a bunch of detail here.) I reviewed the PSARC mail log and could not conclude what the real issues were. I contacted the PSARC case owner - Kais Belgaied to which he replied: >PSARC/2006/683 had a inception then a first commitment review, >but there was no vote. A number of issues have been identified and should be >addressed before commitment. In order to support Java ES the ST folks have created new RPM's for the Linux impl as well as a new Java API which required additional pkgs to be created. As far as I know there is no near-term plan for these new interfaces to be reviewed by any ARC - so this adds additional risk to those components consuming these new interfaces. Now, the thing we're dealing with here is a fasttrack. So, unless someone wants to derail it the question we're trying to cover is is the consuming of these interfaces from this other case (PSARC/2006/683) a small enough change not to warrant a full review. My sense is modulo the fact that a full review might turn up things on the PSARC side that what they are consuming is probably okay. From a process perspective one way to handle this is to assert that since the interfaces are not "approved" they are therefore private and require a contract. That stays within the process boundaries and does not create a bunch of weird artifacts while we try to explain this. The contract addresses part of the problem - the interface consumers and producer will be cognizant of each other and thus reduces the possibility of breakage later - it does not address the situation where the ST project may be doing something fundamentally wrong that when shipped exposes Sun and/or our customers to risk and, given the newly established dependencies on ST by 60 products becomes difficult to fix without costing Sun significant resources. So, if I were going to modify this fasttrack that's what I would do. Glassfish needs either a contract or some assurance that ST will let them know before things change. That's actually a reasonable request since there is no indication based on the management decision that ST will ever come back to the ARC. Since they would then have to complete their first case. Since the contract is meant to force them to consider their consumers that would probably be a good thing given the current state. I disagree. I guess I'm less trusting that the ST architecture is sound. Contracts do not ensure the architecture is sound. Here's a case where we have a broad Sun initative to support Service Tags yet for whatever reason we are looking for ways to hand wave around the fact that the base functionality has not been ARC approved. What's wrong with this picture? I'd much prefer the ST folks be sent back to PSARC to work out some agreement with them. Let's get an ARC to bless this stuff before we end up in a situation we may regret. Chris I'm less concerned about the form of the contract although having one in the case directory would be good. I'm more concerned with the intent in that both parties understand this connection exists and needs to be managed. An observation on Pat's response to the initial question. One way to view that is that the ST team has basically taken on the responsibility of the ARC process since they have chosen to manage the expectations of the 60 products they are dealing with in terms of the interfaces they provide. Otherwise, there is a big chance for things to go wrong here. Essentially, they are creating contracts with all the consumers of ST and managing those. On the one hand that's good. On the other hand it would be good to know that they explicitly signed up for that and understand the implications. -edh Chris Kasso wrote: > I reread the standard wording I suggested we use and I realize the > error here is that the ST project has already been delivered (without > approval). So indicating this project can not be delivered before > the other project doesn't really express the true nature of the problem. > (It implicitly assumes the other case would never be delivered without > first getting ARC approval) > > We could modifiy the wording to: > > The project depends on the following other project and may not be > delivered before PSARC/2006/683 Service Tag is approved. > > Now in theory when the GF PAC is reviewing their release criteria it > should be identified to them that while all the GF ARC cases have > been approved the above condition was established by the ARC. > > The PAC will either realize the significant risk this creates for the > project and thus apply pressure to the ST folks to have their case > approved so as GF can ship *or* the PAC will ignore the condition > because there is perceived pressure to get ST support out and they'll > note that the Solaris PAC granted a waiver to bring ST support into > S10 U4. > > Our job is to point out when these conditions exist so that bad things > don't happen but we very much depend on management to behave in > a responsible way. They have to evaluate the risks vs the need to > ship product. Our job also tends to be to fix problems created > by their choices. > > Chris > > From: Lloyd L Chambers > Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2007 13:14:04 -0700 > > Chris (and WSARC), > > Siraj has suggested modifying the language to read: > > "The project depends on the following other project and may not be > delivered before it: PSARC/2006/683 Service Tag" > > I'll modify the one-pager that way. > > HOWEVER, I think it's a non-solution, because in theory it means > GlassFish can't ship until the PSARC case is approved. From what I > understand from from Pat Ryan (below), the case has been *exempted* > and *will not* be approved. > > How does a language change alter the reality other than as a feel > good solution? I think it undermines the value and authority of the > ARC process to *pretend* that things are kosher. Better to approve > it and explicitly state the problem as part of the approval. > > Lloyd > > On Jun 15, 2007, at 9:42 AM, Chris Kasso wrote: > > >> Additionally we are working with 14 other engagements with over 60 > >> products > >> to be released in the next two quarters. > > > > This only reinforces the need for 2006/683 to get approval. If there > > are problems with 2006/683 they are only going to be magnified as > > these other 60 products are shipped with dependencies on 2006/683. > > > > I think this case can move forward but it needs the standard text: > > > >> The project depends on the following other project and may > >> not be delivered before it... > > > > Chris > > > > From: Lloyd L Chambers > > Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2007 09:29:08 -0700 > > > > [forwarding so it is seen by WSARC members, and goes into the > > mail log] > > > > Begin forwarded message: > > > > From: Pat Ryan > > Date: June 15, 2007 9:26:01 AM PDT > > To: Siraj Ghaffar > > Cc: Brandon E Taylor , Lloyd L Chambers > > , Abhijit Kumar > > Subject: Re: [Fwd: Re: GlassFish V2 Service Tag Support [WSARC/ > > 2007/351 FastTrack timeout 06/21/2007]] > > > > Siraj, > > > > Service Tags started the ARC process and met with PSARC two times > > (2006/683). Service Tags were then exempted from ARC Approval > > requirements by the Solaris PTeam and PAC. At that time, PSARC > > requested that SysNet file an umbrella case providing an overview of > > the entire Sun Connection product from SysNet including the Service > > Tag case. The one pager has been submitted - 2007/330. > > > > At this time Service Tags 1.0 are integrated into Solaris 10U4 and > > ILOM2. Both of which will release in July. Additionally we are > > working with 14 other engagements with over 60 products to be > > released in the next two quarters. Attached is a presentation from > > SysNet's VP that shows the committments made by product teams to > > integrate with Service Tags. 50% of Sun's revenue products will > > have Service Tags 1.0 integrated by the end of FY'07. > > > > Regards, > > Pat > > > > > > Siraj Ghaffar wrote: > >> Hi Pat, Brandon, > >> Has the Service Tag project not gone through the ARC process? We > >> have issues going through WSARC as the Glassfish support for > >> Service Tags depends on the Service Tags project. > >> > >> Thanks > >> > >> > >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> - > >> -- > >> > >> Subject: > >> Re: GlassFish V2 Service Tag Support [WSARC/2007/351 FastTrack > >> timeout 06/21/2007] > >> From: > >> Lloyd L Chambers > >> Date: > >> Fri, 15 Jun 2007 08:49:54 -0700 > >> To: > >> James Carlson , Siraj Ghaffar > >> > >> > >> To: > >> James Carlson , Siraj Ghaffar > >> > >> CC: > >> WSARC@sac.sfbay.sun.com > >> > >> > >> James, > >> > >> Thank you. > >> > >> SIRAJ, why are we depending on a facility that did not complete an > >> ARC review? > >> > >> If an ARC review was too much trouble for the Service Tags team, > >> what does that say about depending on such a facility? > >> > >> Lloyd > >> > >> On Jun 15, 2007, at 4:11 AM, James Carlson wrote: > >> > >>> Lloyd L. Chambers writes: > >>>> This project introduces support for Service Tags in > >>>> Glassfish, using the > >>>> Service Tag Registry client. Service Tag Registry is a local > >>>> repository containing > >>>> a list of product instances installed on a system. Refer to > >>>> ARC case > >>>> PSARC/2006/683/ for details of the Service Tags project. With > >>>> this support built > >>>> in, Glassfish installer will register Glassfish in the > >>>> Service Tag Registry, during > >>>> installation. > >>> > >>> Given that it's dependent on 2006/683, this project may have a > >>> bit of > >>> a process problem. The project team for 2006/683 did not complete > >>> ARC > >>> review and the product seems to have shipped without it. > >>> > >>> --James Carlson, Solaris Networking > >>> > >>> Sun Microsystems / 1 Network Drive 71.232W Vox +1 781 > >>> 442 2084 > >>> MS UBUR02-212 / Burlington MA 01803-2757 42.496N Fax +1 781 > >>> 442 1677 > >> > > > > > > > > --Boundary_(ID_UAYIh4wcDd3D1P4TjZ86oQ) > > Content-type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 > > Content-transfer-encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE > > > > > space; = > > -khtml-line-break: after-white-space; ">[forwarding so it is seen > > by = > > WSARC members, and goes into the mail log]

Begin > > for= > > warded message:

> sty= > > le=3D"margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; > > margin-= > > left: 0px; "> > color=3D"#000000" st= > > yle=3D"font: 12.0px Helvetica; color: #000000">From: > FONT> > ONT face=3D"Helvetica" size=3D"3" style=3D"font: 12.0px > > Helvetica">Pa= > > t Ryan <Pat.Ryan@Sun.COM > A>&g= > > t;
> marg= > > in-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; "> > =3D"3" color=3D"#000000" style=3D"font: 12.0px Helvetica; color: > > #000= > > 000">Date: > =3D"font: 12.0px Helvetica">June 15, 2007 9:26:01 AM PDT > DIV>= > >
> 0px; ma= > > rgin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; "> > =3D"Helvetica" size=3D"3" color=3D"#000000" style=3D"font: 12.0px > > Hel= > > vetica; color: #000000">Cc: > face=3D"Helvetica" si= > > ze=3D"3" style=3D"font: 12.0px Helvetica">Brandon E Taylor < > hre= > > f=3D"mailto:Brandon.Taylor@Sun.COM">Brandon.Taylor@Sun.COM > A>>, L= > > loyd L Chambers < > href=3D"mailto:Lloyd.Chambers@Sun.COM">Lloyd.C= > > hambers@Sun.COM>, Abhijit Kumar < > href=3D"mailto:Abhijit.= > > Kumar@Sun.COM">Abhijit.Kumar@Sun.COM>
> =3D"margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; > > margin-le= > > ft: 0px; "> > styl= > > e=3D"font: 12.0px Helvetica; color: #000000">Subject: > FONT><= > > FONT face=3D"Helvetica" size=3D"3" style=3D"font: 12.0px > > Helvetica"><= > > B>Re: [Fwd: Re: GlassFish V2 Service Tag Support [WSARC/2007/351 > > Fast= > > Track timeout 06/21/2007]]
> top: = > > 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; min- > > hei= > > ght: 14px; ">
> right: = > > 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">Siraj,
> =3D"margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; > > margin-le= > > ft: 0px; min-height: 14px; ">
> 0px;= > > margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; > > ">Service T= > > ags started the ARC process and met with PSARC two times > > (2006/683).<= > > SPAN class=3D"Apple-converted-space">=A0 Service Tags were > > the= > > n exempted from ARC Approval requirements by the Solaris PTeam > > and PA= > > C.=A0 At that > > time, > class=3D"Apple-converted-space">=A0 PSARC requested that > > SysN= > > et file an umbrella case providing an overview of the entire Sun > > Conn= > > ection product from SysNet including the Service Tag case. > class= > > =3D"Apple-converted-space">=A0 =A0 The one pager has been > > subm= > > itted - 2007/330.
> right: 0= > > px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; min-height: 14px; > > ">
> IV>
> bottom: 0= > > px; margin-left: 0px; ">At this time Service Tags 1.0 are > > integrated = > > into Solaris 10U4 and ILOM2.= > > =A0 Both of which will release in July. > class=3D"Apple-co= > > nverted-space">=A0 Additionally we are working with 14 > > other e= > > ngagements with over 60 products to be released in the next two > > quart= > > ers.=A0 Attached is > > a pr= > > esentation from SysNet's VP that shows > converted-= > > space">=A0 the committments made by product teams to > > integrate= > > with Service Tags. =A0 > SPAN>= > > 50% of Sun's revenue products will have Service Tags 1.0 > > integrated b= > > y the end of FY'07.
> right:= > > 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; min-height: 14px; > > ">
<= > > /DIV>
> bottom:= > > 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">Regards,
> 0px= > > ; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">Pat > DIV= > >>
> ; margin-left: 0px; min-height: 14px; ">
> style=3D"margi= > > n-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: > > 0px; = > > min-height: 14px; ">
> margin-r= > > ight: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">Siraj Ghaffar > > wrot= > > e:
> mar= > > gin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">Hi Pat, > > Brand= > > on,
> bot= > > tom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">Has the Service Tag project not > > gone th= > > rough the ARC process? We have issues going through WSARC as the > > Glas= > > sfish support for Service Tags depends on the Service Tags > > project. > DIV>
> bottom: = > > 0px; margin-left: 0px; min-height: 14px; ">
> style=3D"ma= > > rgin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin- > > left: 0p= > > x; ">Thanks
> 0px; ma= > > rgin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; min-height: 14px; ">
>> DIV>> > > V style=3D"margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: > > 0px; ma= > > rgin-left: 0px; min-height: 14px; ">
> style=3D"margin-to= > > p: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; > > ">--= > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------= > > -
> botto= > > m: 0px; margin-left: 0px; min-height: 14px; ">
> =3D"margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; > > margin-le= > > ft: 0px; ">Subject:
> right:= > > 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">Re: GlassFish V2 > > Servic= > > e Tag Support [WSARC/2007/351 FastTrack timeout 06/21/2007] > DIV> > style=3D"margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; > > mar= > > gin-left: 0px; ">From:
> rig= > > ht: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">Lloyd L Chambers > > <= > > ; > href=3D"mailto:Lloyd.Chambers@Sun.COM">Lloyd.Chambers@Sun.COM= > > >
> margin-bo= > > ttom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">Date:
> top: 0= > > px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; > > ">Fri, 1= > > 5 Jun 2007 08:49:54 -0700
> margin-= > > right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">To:
> sty= > > le=3D"margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; > > margin-= > > left: 0px; ">James Carlson < > href=3D"mailto:James.D.Carlson@Sun.= > > COM">James.D.Carlson@Sun.COM>, Siraj Ghaffar < > href=3D"ma= > > ilto:Siraj.Ghaffar@Sun.COM">Siraj.Ghaffar@Sun.COM> > DIV>
> tyle=3D"margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; > > margi= > > n-left: 0px; min-height: 14px; ">
> top: = > > 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; > > ">To: > DIV>
> bottom: = > > 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">James Carlson < > href=3D"mailto:James.D.= > > Carlson@Sun.COM">James.D.Carlson@Sun.COM>, Siraj Ghaffar > > <<= > > A href=3D"mailto:Siraj.Ghaffar@Sun.COM">Siraj.Ghaffar@Sun.COM > A>>= > >
> bottom= > > : 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">CC:
> 0px; ma= > > rgin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; "> > href=3D"m= > > ailto:WSARC@sac.sfbay.sun.com">WSARC@sac.sfbay.sun.com > DIV>
> style=3D"margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; > > marg= > > in-left: 0px; min-height: 14px; ">
> top:= > > 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; > > min-he= > > ight: 14px; ">
> right: = > > 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">James,
> =3D"margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; > > margin-le= > > ft: 0px; min-height: 14px; ">
> 0px;= > > margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">Thank > > you= > > .
> botto= > > m: 0px; margin-left: 0px; min-height: 14px; ">
> =3D"margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; > > margin-le= > > ft: 0px; ">SIRAJ, why are we depending on a facility that did not > > com= > > plete an ARC review?
> right= > > : 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; min-height: 14px; > > ">
= > >
> bottom= > > : 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">If an ARC review was too much trouble > > for = > > the Service Tags team, what does that say about depending on such > > a f= > > acility?
> margi= > > n-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; min-height: 14px; ">
> DIV>
> tyle=3D"margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; > > margi= > > n-left: 0px; ">Lloyd
> right= > > : 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; min-height: 14px; > > ">
= > >
> bottom= > > : 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">On Jun 15, 2007, at 4:11 AM, James > > Carlson= > > wrote:
> margin= > > -bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; min-height: 14px; ">
> > > QUOTE type=3D"cite">
> 0px;= > > margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">Lloyd L. Chambers > > writes: > IV>
> margin-r= > > ight: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; "> > class=3D"App= > > le-converted-space">=A0 =A0 This project introduces > > support fo= > > r Service Tags in Glassfish, using the
> top:= > > 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; > > "> > N class=3D"Apple-converted-space">=A0 =A0 Service Tag > > Registry= > > client. Service Tag Registry is a local repository containing > DIV><= > > DIV style=3D"margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: > > 0px; = > > margin-left: 0px; ">=A0 =A0 > > > PAN>a list of product instances installed on a system. Refer to > > ARC c= > > ase
> bot= > > tom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; "> > space">= > > =A0 =A0 PSARC/2006/683/ for details of the Service Tags > > projec= > > t. With this support built
> margin= > > -right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; "> > class=3D"A= > > pple-converted-space">=A0 =A0 in, Glassfish installer will > > reg= > > ister Glassfish in the Service Tag Registry, during
> =3D"margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; > > margin-le= > > ft: 0px; ">=A0 =A0 > SPAN>insta= > > llation.
> rig= > > ht: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; min-height: 14px; > > "> > R>
> bott= > > om: 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">Given that it's dependent on > > 2006/683, t= > > his project may have a bit of
> mar= > > gin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">a process > > pro= > > blem.=A0 The project > > tea= > > m for 2006/683 did not complete ARC
> top: 0p= > > x; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; > > ">review = > > and the product seems to have shipped without it.
> =3D"margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; > > margin-le= > > ft: 0px; min-height: 14px; ">
> 0px;= > > margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">-- > > James C= > > arlson, Solaris Networking > space">=A0 = > > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 < > href=3D"mailto:james.d.carlson@= > > sun.com">james.d.carlson@sun.com>
> style=3D"margin-to= > > p: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; > > ">Su= > > n Microsystems / 1 Network Drive > space= > > ">=A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 71.232W > space= > > ">=A0 Vox +1 781 442 2084
> 0px; = > > margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">MS > > UBUR02-= > > 212 / Burlington MA 01803-2757 > space">= > > =A0 42.496N =A0 > SPAN>F= > > ax +1 781 442 1677
> 0px; = > > margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; min- > > height: = > > 14px; ">
> margin= > > -right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; min-height: > > 14px; = > > ">

> > > > --Boundary_(ID_UAYIh4wcDd3D1P4TjZ86oQ)-- > > > > > From sacadmin Fri Jun 15 16:23:14 2007 Received: from sfbaymail1sca.SFBay.Sun.COM (sfbaymail1sca.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.145.154.35]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l5FNNDVc011589; Fri, 15 Jun 2007 16:23:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sca-es-mail-1.sun.com (sca-es-mail-1.Sun.COM [192.18.43.132]) by sfbaymail1sca.SFBay.Sun.COM (8.13.6+Sun/8.13.6/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l5FNLerK015854; Fri, 15 Jun 2007 16:21:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from fe-sfbay-10.sun.com ([192.18.43.129]) by sca-es-mail-1.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id l5FNLZFL000991; Fri, 15 Jun 2007 16:21:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from conversion-daemon.fe-sfbay-10.sun.com by fe-sfbay-10.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-8.04 (built Feb 28 2007)) id <0JJP00B01A7KY100@fe-sfbay-10.sun.com> (original mail from Lloyd.Chambers@Sun.COM); Fri, 15 Jun 2007 16:21:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.1.8] (llc4.com [208.65.183.162]) by fe-sfbay-10.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-8.04 (built Feb 28 2007)) with ESMTPSA id <0JJP00L4PA7YAO00@fe-sfbay-10.sun.com>; Fri, 15 Jun 2007 16:21:35 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2007 16:21:28 -0700 From: Lloyd L Chambers Subject: Re: GlassFish V2 Service Tag Support [WSARC/2007/351 FastTrack timeout 06/21/2007] In-reply-to: <46730CC3.1000008@sun.com> Sender: Lloyd.Chambers@Sun.COM To: Edward Hunter Cc: "Lloyd L. Chambers" , WSARC@sac.sfbay.sun.com, Siraj.Ghaffar@Sun.COM Message-id: MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.752.3) Content-type: text/plain; format=flowed; delsp=yes; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT References: <200706150143.l5F1h3re012089@sac.sfbay.sun.com> <46730CC3.1000008@sun.com> Status: RO Content-Length: 6262 Yes, AFAIK. On Jun 15, 2007, at 3:03 PM, Edward Hunter wrote: > Is this separate from the JES MF case that we approved? Meaning > will we see a fasttrack (or something) that connects Glassfish with > the JES version of service tags? > -edh > > Lloyd L. Chambers wrote: >> Template Version: @(#)sac_nextcase 1.63 06/14/07 SMI >> This information is Copyright 2007 Sun Microsystems >> 1. Introduction >> 1.1. Project/Component Working Name: >> GlassFish V2 Service Tag Support >> 1.2. Name of Document Author/Supplier: >> Author: Siraj Ghaffar >> 1.3 Date of This Document: >> 14 June, 2007 >> 4. Technical Description >> >> 1. Introduction >> 1.1. Project/Component Working Name: >> Service Tags Support for Glassfish v2/Sun Java System Application >> Server 9.1 >> >> 1.2. Name(s) and e-mail address of Document Author(s)/Supplier: >> Siraj Ghaffar : Siraj.Ghaffar@Sun.Com >> >> 1.3. Date of This Document: June 14, 2007 >> >> >> 2. Project Summary >> 2.1. Project Description: >> >> This project introduces support for Service Tags in Glassfish, >> using the >> Service Tag Registry client. Service Tag Registry is a local >> repository containing a list of product instances installed on a >> system. Refer to ARC case PSARC/2006/683/ for details of the >> Service Tags project. With this support built in, Glassfish >> installer will register Glassfish in the Service Tag Registry, >> during installation. >> >> Service Tags are eventually retrieved and sent to Sun for various >> business purposes. Refer to Section 1.2 of the Service Tags >> functional specification at http://sac.sfbay/PSARC/2006/683/ >> commitment.materials/ST_ARC_v4.pdf >> for details on business motivations for collecting this data. >> >> 2.2. Risks and Assumptions: >> The project depends on timely delivery of the Service Tag >> Registry tool, >> "stclient", and its associated components. The tool is expected >> to be >> available in Solaris 10 Update 4. >> >> >> 3. Problem Summary >> 3.1. Problem Area: >> >> Sun cannot measure its install base of products. This applies to >> Glassfish as well. Glassfish support for Service Tags enables >> querying mechanisms to discover Glassfish installations. >> Refer to Section 1.2 of the Service Tags functional specification >> at http://sac.sfbay/PSARC/2006/683/commitment.materials/ >> ST_ARC_v4.pdf >> for a description of goals and objectives. The description >> applies to Glassfish, >> as it does to other Sun products. >> >> >> 3.2. Justification: >> Service Tag support is a required feature of Glassfish >> >> >> 4. Technical Description: >> 4.1. Details: >> >> Service Tag Registry is a local repository containing a list of >> product >> instances installed on the system. This project introduces >> support for Glassfish registration in the Service Tag Registry, >> using the command line interface, "stclient". This interface is >> part of the Service Tag project and will be available with >> Solaris 10 update 4. Other platforms are likely to be supported >> later. >> The stclient tool requires product identification from Project >> SwordFish (http://metadata.central.sun.com). A product ID has >> already been obtained for Glassfish. This project adds a new >> script, "servicetag_wrapper" to Glassfish. This script will call >> the stclient tool with Glassfish specific parameters. The >> Glassfish installer will invoke "servicetag_wrapper" during >> installation. The user will be able to invoke >> "servicetag_wrapper", when upgrading to Solaris 10 update 4 (or >> later) after GlassFish has been installed. >> >> Refer to Section 2 of Service Tag Functional spec at >> http://sac.sfbay/PSARC/2006/683/commitment.materials/ST_ARC_v4.pdf >> for architecture and technical details of the Service Tags >> Project. >> 4.2. Bug/RFE Number(s): >> None >> >> 4.3. In Scope: >> The mechanism to add and delete the service tag registry entry >> for Glassfish (outside JES) >> >> 4.4. Out of Scope: >> Mechanisms to query the service tag registry entry from the >> client machine >> and send information back to Sun. >> >> 4.5. Interfaces: >> >> 4.5.1 Exported Interfaces >> >> Interface: Registration script (servicetag_wrapper) >> Stability: unstable >> Comments:Referred in section 4.1, 4.6 >> >> >> 4.5.2 Imported interfaces >> >> Interface: ST CLI (stclient) >> Stability: Stable >> Exporting Project: Sun Service Tag ARC Case PSARC/ >> 2006/683 >> Comments: Referred in section 2.2, 4.1 >> >> >> 4.6. Doc Impact: >> Documentation on how to invoke the "servicetag_wrapper" script. >> >> 4.7. Admin/Config Impact: >> None. >> >> 4.8. HA Impact: >> None. >> >> 4.9. I18N/L10N Impact: >> None. >> >> 4.10. Packaging & Delivery: >> This will be part of the Glassfish installer code. This feature >> is not available >> on GlassFish jar distribution available from java.net. It will be >> available in >> Sun branded distributions. >> >> 4.11. Security Impact: >> None >> >> 4.12. Compatibility Impact >> None >> >> 4.13. Dependencies: >> Depends on delivery of Service Tag Registry command line >> interface, "stclient" and its associated components in a timely >> fashion. It is expected that the interface will be available in >> Solaris 10 Update 4. >> >> 5. Reference Documents: >> >> Service Tag ARC Case : PSARC/2006/683/ >> >> Service Tags Functional Spec : >> http://sac.sfbay/PSARC/2006/683/commitment.materials/ST_ARC_v4.pdf >> >> stclient CLI : >> http://sac.sfbay/PSARC/2006/683/commitment.materials/stclient.pdf >> >> Umbrella case for Sun Java System Application Server 9.0(includes >> Glassfish installer): WSARC/2005/229/ >> >> >> 6. Schedule: >> 6.1. Projected Availability: >> June 2007 >> >> >> 6. Resources and Schedule >> 6.4. Steering Committee requested information >> 6.4.1. Consolidation C-team Name: >> GlassFish >> 6.5. ARC review type: FastTrack >> 6.6. ARC Exposure: open >> >> > From sacadmin Fri Jun 15 16:31:19 2007 Received: from sfbaymail1sca.SFBay.Sun.COM (sfbaymail1sca.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.145.154.35]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l5FNVJ6s011629 for ; Fri, 15 Jun 2007 16:31:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sca-es-mail-1.sun.com (sca-es-mail-1.Sun.COM [192.18.43.132]) by sfbaymail1sca.SFBay.Sun.COM (8.13.6+Sun/8.13.6/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l5FNTjlp018311 for ; Fri, 15 Jun 2007 16:29:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from fe-sfbay-10.sun.com ([192.18.43.129]) by sca-es-mail-1.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id l5FNTeOA001579 for ; Fri, 15 Jun 2007 16:29:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from conversion-daemon.fe-sfbay-10.sun.com by fe-sfbay-10.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-8.04 (built Feb 28 2007)) id <0JJP00G01AHRTG00@fe-sfbay-10.sun.com> (original mail from Lloyd.Chambers@Sun.COM) for WSARC@sac.sfbay.sun.com; Fri, 15 Jun 2007 16:29:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.1.8] ([129.150.16.61]) by fe-sfbay-10.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-8.04 (built Feb 28 2007)) with ESMTPSA id <0JJP00L6IAL7AO00@fe-sfbay-10.sun.com>; Fri, 15 Jun 2007 16:29:32 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2007 16:29:30 -0700 From: Lloyd L Chambers Subject: Re: WSARC/2007/351 FastTrack GlassFish Service tags In-reply-to: <46731087.6040808@sun.com> Sender: Lloyd.Chambers@Sun.COM To: WSARC@sac.sfbay.sun.com Cc: Siraj Ghaffar , Tim Marsland , Robert Brewin Message-id: MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.752.3) Content-type: text/plain; format=flowed; delsp=yes; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT References: <200706152144.l5FLix1X018964@aha.red.iplanet.com> <46731087.6040808@sun.com> Status: RO Content-Length: 27514 Ed, If 60 products depend on the Service Tags interfaces, why single out GlassFish for a contract? The problem seems far larger than just GlassFish. If GlassFish does a contract and the other 59 products do not, it seems like a complete waste of time. Lloyd On Jun 15, 2007, at 3:19 PM, Edward Hunter wrote: > Granted we can't be sure, given that the PSARC case did not > complete, whether or not there are other > issues lurking. However, the main bone of contention was around > secure by default. ST wanted > to not be held to that security policy. The ARC objected. > Management decided that the policy did > not apply in this case. Rather than let the case complete with > that caveat they just waived the whole > process. (I'm probably leaving out a bunch of detail here.) > > Now, the thing we're dealing with here is a fasttrack. So, unless > someone wants to derail it the question > we're trying to cover is is the consuming of these interfaces from > this other case (PSARC/2006/683) a small enough change > not to warrant a full review. My sense is modulo the fact that a > full review might turn up things on the PSARC > side that what they are consuming is probably okay. > From a process perspective one way to handle this is to assert that > since the interfaces are not "approved" they > are therefore private and require a contract. That stays within > the process boundaries and does not create a bunch > of weird artifacts while we try to explain this. > So, if I were going to modify this fasttrack that's what I would > do. Glassfish needs either a contract or some > assurance that ST will let them know before things change. That's > actually a reasonable request since there is > no indication based on the management decision that ST will ever > come back to the ARC. Since they would > then have to complete their first case. Since the contract is > meant to force them to consider their consumers > that would probably be a good thing given the current state. > > I'm less concerned about the form of the contract although having > one in the case directory would be good. I'm > more concerned with the intent in that both parties understand this > connection exists and needs to be managed. > > An observation on Pat's response to the initial question. One way > to view that is that the ST team has basically > taken on the responsibility of the ARC process since they have > chosen to manage the expectations of the 60 products > they are dealing with in terms of the interfaces they provide. > Otherwise, there is a big chance for things to go wrong here. > Essentially, they are creating contracts with all the consumers of > ST and managing those. On the one hand that's good. > On the other hand it would be good to know that they explicitly > signed up for that and understand the implications. > -edh > > Chris Kasso wrote: >> I reread the standard wording I suggested we use and I realize the >> error here is that the ST project has already been delivered (without >> approval). So indicating this project can not be delivered before >> the other project doesn't really express the true nature of the >> problem. >> (It implicitly assumes the other case would never be delivered >> without >> first getting ARC approval) >> We could modifiy the wording to: >> >> The project depends on the following other project and may not be >> delivered before PSARC/2006/683 Service Tag is approved. >> >> Now in theory when the GF PAC is reviewing their release criteria it >> should be identified to them that while all the GF ARC cases have >> been approved the above condition was established by the ARC. >> >> The PAC will either realize the significant risk this creates for the >> project and thus apply pressure to the ST folks to have their case >> approved so as GF can ship *or* the PAC will ignore the condition >> because there is perceived pressure to get ST support out and they'll >> note that the Solaris PAC granted a waiver to bring ST support into >> S10 U4. >> >> Our job is to point out when these conditions exist so that bad >> things >> don't happen but we very much depend on management to behave in >> a responsible way. They have to evaluate the risks vs the need to >> ship product. Our job also tends to be to fix problems created >> by their choices. >> >> Chris >> >> From: Lloyd L Chambers >> Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2007 13:14:04 -0700 >> >> Chris (and WSARC), >> Siraj has suggested modifying the language to read: >> "The project depends on the following other project and may >> not be delivered before it: PSARC/2006/683 Service Tag" >> I'll modify the one-pager that way. >> HOWEVER, I think it's a non-solution, because in theory it >> means GlassFish can't ship until the PSARC case is approved. >> From what I understand from from Pat Ryan (below), the case has >> been *exempted* and *will not* be approved. >> How does a language change alter the reality other than as a >> feel good solution? I think it undermines the value and >> authority of the ARC process to *pretend* that things are >> kosher. Better to approve it and explicitly state the problem >> as part of the approval. >> Lloyd >> On Jun 15, 2007, at 9:42 AM, Chris Kasso wrote: >> >> Additionally we are working with 14 other engagements with >> over 60 >> products >> >> to be released in the next two quarters. >> > >> > This only reinforces the need for 2006/683 to get approval. >> If there >> > are problems with 2006/683 they are only going to be magnified as >> > these other 60 products are shipped with dependencies on >> 2006/683. >> > >> > I think this case can move forward but it needs the standard >> text: >> > >> >> The project depends on the following other project and may >> >> not be delivered before it... >> > >> > Chris >> > >> > From: Lloyd L Chambers >> > Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2007 09:29:08 -0700 >> > >> > [forwarding so it is seen by WSARC members, and goes into >> the > mail log] >> > >> > Begin forwarded message: >> > >> > From: Pat Ryan >> > Date: June 15, 2007 9:26:01 AM PDT >> > To: Siraj Ghaffar >> > Cc: Brandon E Taylor , Lloyd L Chambers >> > , Abhijit Kumar >> > Subject: Re: [Fwd: Re: GlassFish V2 Service Tag Support [WSARC/ >> > 2007/351 FastTrack timeout 06/21/2007]] >> > >> > Siraj, >> > >> > Service Tags started the ARC process and met with PSARC two >> times >> > (2006/683). Service Tags were then exempted from ARC Approval >> > requirements by the Solaris PTeam and PAC. At that time, >> PSARC >> > requested that SysNet file an umbrella case providing an >> overview of >> > the entire Sun Connection product from SysNet including the >> Service >> > Tag case. The one pager has been submitted - 2007/330. >> > >> > At this time Service Tags 1.0 are integrated into Solaris >> 10U4 and >> > ILOM2. Both of which will release in July. Additionally we >> are >> > working with 14 other engagements with over 60 products to be >> > released in the next two quarters. Attached is a >> presentation from >> > SysNet's VP that shows the committments made by product >> teams to >> > integrate with Service Tags. 50% of Sun's revenue products >> will >> > have Service Tags 1.0 integrated by the end of FY'07. >> > >> > Regards, >> > Pat >> > >> > >> > Siraj Ghaffar wrote: >> >> Hi Pat, Brandon, >> >> Has the Service Tag project not gone through the ARC process? We >> >> have issues going through WSARC as the Glassfish support for >> >> Service Tags depends on the Service Tags project. >> >> >> >> Thanks >> >> >> >> >> >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> - >> >> -- >> >> >> >> Subject: >> >> Re: GlassFish V2 Service Tag Support [WSARC/2007/351 FastTrack >> >> timeout 06/21/2007] >> >> From: >> >> Lloyd L Chambers >> >> Date: >> >> Fri, 15 Jun 2007 08:49:54 -0700 >> >> To: >> >> James Carlson , Siraj Ghaffar >> >> >> >> >> >> To: >> >> James Carlson , Siraj Ghaffar >> >> >> >> CC: >> >> WSARC@sac.sfbay.sun.com >> >> >> >> >> >> James, >> >> >> >> Thank you. >> >> >> >> SIRAJ, why are we depending on a facility that did not >> complete an >> >> ARC review? >> >> >> >> If an ARC review was too much trouble for the Service Tags team, >> >> what does that say about depending on such a facility? >> >> >> >> Lloyd >> >> >> >> On Jun 15, 2007, at 4:11 AM, James Carlson wrote: >> >> >> >>> Lloyd L. Chambers writes: >> >>>> This project introduces support for Service Tags in >> >>>> Glassfish, using the >> >>>> Service Tag Registry client. Service Tag Registry is a >> local >> >>>> repository containing >> >>>> a list of product instances installed on a system. >> Refer to >> >>>> ARC case >> >>>> PSARC/2006/683/ for details of the Service Tags >> project. With >> >>>> this support built >> >>>> in, Glassfish installer will register Glassfish in the >> >>>> Service Tag Registry, during >> >>>> installation. >> >>> >> >>> Given that it's dependent on 2006/683, this project may have >> a >>> bit of >> >>> a process problem. The project team for 2006/683 did not >> complete >> >>> ARC >> >>> review and the product seems to have shipped without it. >> >>> >> >>> --James Carlson, Solaris Networking >> >>> >> >>> Sun Microsystems / 1 Network Drive 71.232W Vox +1 781 >> >>> 442 2084 >> >>> MS UBUR02-212 / Burlington MA 01803-2757 42.496N Fax +1 781 >> >>> 442 1677 >> >> >> > >> > >> > >> > --Boundary_(ID_UAYIh4wcDd3D1P4TjZ86oQ) >> > Content-type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 >> > Content-transfer-encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE >> > >> > > mode: > space; = >> > -khtml-line-break: after-white-space; ">[forwarding so it is >> seen > by = >> > WSARC members, and goes into the mail log] >>

Begin > for= >> > warded message:

> newline">
sty= >> > le=3D"margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: >> 0px; > margin-= >> > left: 0px; "> >> color=3D"#000000" st= >> > yle=3D"font: 12.0px Helvetica; color: #000000">From: > B> FONT>> > ONT face=3D"Helvetica" size=3D"3" style=3D"font: 12.0px > >> Helvetica">Pa= >> > t Ryan <> href=3D"mailto:Pat.Ryan@Sun.COM">Pat.Ryan@Sun.COM A>&g= >> > t;
> 0px; > marg= >> > in-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">> size= >> > =3D"3" color=3D"#000000" style=3D"font: 12.0px Helvetica; >> color: > #000= >> > 000">Date: > style= >> > =3D"font: 12.0px Helvetica">June 15, 2007 9:26:01 AM PDT> FONT> DIV>= >> >
> top: > 0px; ma= >> > rgin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; >> ">> > =3D"Helvetica" size=3D"3" color=3D"#000000" style=3D"font: >> 12.0px > Hel= >> > vetica; color: #000000">Cc: >> face=3D"Helvetica" si= >> > ze=3D"3" style=3D"font: 12.0px Helvetica">Brandon E Taylor >> < hre= >> > >> f=3D"mailto:Brandon.Taylor@Sun.COM">Brandon.Taylor@Sun.COM >> A>>, L= >> > loyd L Chambers < >> href=3D"mailto:Lloyd.Chambers@Sun.COM">Lloyd.C= >> > hambers@Sun.COM>, Abhijit Kumar < >> href=3D"mailto:Abhijit.= >> > Kumar@Sun.COM">Abhijit.Kumar@Sun.COM>> DIV>
> > =3D"margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: >> 0px; > margin-le= >> > ft: 0px; ">> color=3D"#000000" > styl= >> > e=3D"font: 12.0px Helvetica; color: #000000">Subject: > B> FONT><= >> > FONT face=3D"Helvetica" size=3D"3" style=3D"font: 12.0px >> > Helvetica"><= >> > B>Re: [Fwd: Re: GlassFish V2 Service Tag Support [WSARC/ >> 2007/351 > Fast= >> > Track timeout 06/21/2007]]
> style=3D"margin- > top: = >> > 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: >> 0px; min- > hei= >> > ght: 14px; ">
> margin- > right: = >> > 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">Siraj,> DIV>
> > =3D"margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: >> 0px; > margin-le= >> > ft: 0px; min-height: 14px; ">
> top: > 0px;= >> > margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; >> > ">Service T= >> > ags started the ARC process and met with PSARC two times >> > (2006/683).<= >> > SPAN class=3D"Apple-converted-space">=A0 Service Tags >> were > the= >> > n exempted from ARC Approval requirements by the Solaris >> PTeam > and PA= >> > C.=A0 At >> that > time,> > class=3D"Apple-converted-space">=A0 PSARC requested >> that > SysN= >> > et file an umbrella case providing an overview of the entire >> Sun > Conn= >> > ection product from SysNet including the Service Tag >> case. class= >> > =3D"Apple-converted-space">=A0 =A0 The one pager has >> been > subm= >> > itted - 2007/330.
> margin- > right: 0= >> > px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; min-height: >> 14px; > ">
> > IV>
> margin- > bottom: 0= >> > px; margin-left: 0px; ">At this time Service Tags 1.0 are >> > integrated = >> > into Solaris 10U4 and ILOM2.> space">= >> > =A0 Both of which will release in July. >> class=3D"Apple-co= >> > nverted-space">=A0 Additionally we are working with >> 14 > other e= >> > ngagements with over 60 products to be released in the next >> two > quart= >> > ers.=A0 > SPAN>Attached is > a pr= >> > esentation from SysNet's VP that shows> class=3D"Apple- > converted-= >> > space">=A0 the committments made by product teams >> to > integrate= >> > with Service Tags. > space">=A0 SPAN>= >> > 50% of Sun's revenue products will have Service Tags 1.0 >> > integrated b= >> > y the end of FY'07.
> margin- > right:= >> > 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; min-height: >> 14px; > ">
<= >> > /DIV>
> margin- > bottom:= >> > 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">Regards,
> top: > 0px= >> > ; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; >> ">Pat DIV= >> >>
> bottom: 0px= >> > ; margin-left: 0px; min-height: 14px; ">
>> style=3D"margi= >> > n-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin- >> left: > 0px; = >> > min-height: 14px; ">
> 0px; > margin-r= >> > ight: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">Siraj >> Ghaffar > wrot= >> > e:
> 0px; > mar= >> > gin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">Hi >> Pat, > Brand= >> > on,
> margin- > bot= >> > tom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">Has the Service Tag project >> not > gone th= >> > rough the ARC process? We have issues going through WSARC as >> the > Glas= >> > sfish support for Service Tags depends on the Service >> Tags > project.> > DIV>
> margin- > bottom: = >> > 0px; margin-left: 0px; min-height: 14px; ">
> > style=3D"ma= >> > rgin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; >> margin- > left: 0p= >> > x; ">Thanks
> right: > 0px; ma= >> > rgin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; min-height: 14px; ">
>> DIV>>> >> > V style=3D"margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin- >> bottom: > 0px; ma= >> > rgin-left: 0px; min-height: 14px; ">
>> style=3D"margin-to= >> > p: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: >> 0px; > ">--= >> > > >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> = >> > -
> margin- > botto= >> > m: 0px; margin-left: 0px; min-height: 14px; ">
> style= >> > =3D"margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: >> 0px; > margin-le= >> > ft: 0px; ">Subject:
> margin- > right:= >> > 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">Re: GlassFish >> V2 > Servic= >> > e Tag Support [WSARC/2007/351 FastTrack timeout 06/21/2007] >> DIV>> > style=3D"margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: >> 0px; > mar= >> > gin-left: 0px; ">From:
> margin- > rig= >> > ht: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">Lloyd L >> Chambers > <= >> > ; >> href=3D"mailto:Lloyd.Chambers@Sun.COM">Lloyd.Chambers@Sun.COM= >> > >
> 0px; > margin-bo= >> > ttom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">Date:
> style=3D"margin- > top: 0= >> > px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: >> 0px; > ">Fri, 1= >> > 5 Jun 2007 08:49:54 -0700
> 0px; > margin-= >> > right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">To:> DIV>
sty= >> > le=3D"margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: >> 0px; > margin-= >> > left: 0px; ">James Carlson < >> href=3D"mailto:James.D.Carlson@Sun.= >> > COM">James.D.Carlson@Sun.COM>, Siraj Ghaffar >> < href=3D"ma= >> > ilto:Siraj.Ghaffar@Sun.COM">Siraj.Ghaffar@Sun.COM> A>> DIV>
> > tyle=3D"margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: >> 0px; > margi= >> > n-left: 0px; min-height: 14px; ">
> style=3D"margin- > top: = >> > 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: >> 0px; > ">To:> > DIV>
> margin- > bottom: = >> > 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">James Carlson < >> href=3D"mailto:James.D.= >> > Carlson@Sun.COM">James.D.Carlson@Sun.COM>, Siraj >> Ghaffar > <<= >> > A >> href=3D"mailto:Siraj.Ghaffar@Sun.COM">Siraj.Ghaffar@Sun.COM >> A>>= >> >
> margin- > bottom= >> > : 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">CC:
> top: > 0px; ma= >> > rgin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; >> "> href=3D"m= >> > ailto:WSARC@sac.sfbay.sun.com">WSARC@sac.sfbay.sun.com> A> DIV>
> > style=3D"margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: >> 0px; > marg= >> > in-left: 0px; min-height: 14px; ">
> style=3D"margin- > top:= >> > 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: >> 0px; > min-he= >> > ight: 14px; ">
> margin- > right: = >> > 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">James,> DIV>
> > =3D"margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: >> 0px; > margin-le= >> > ft: 0px; min-height: 14px; ">
> top: > 0px;= >> > margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; >> ">Thank > you= >> > .
> margin- > botto= >> > m: 0px; margin-left: 0px; min-height: 14px; ">
> style= >> > =3D"margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: >> 0px; > margin-le= >> > ft: 0px; ">SIRAJ, why are we depending on a facility that >> did not > com= >> > plete an ARC review?
> margin- > right= >> > : 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; min-height: >> 14px; > ">
= >> >
> margin- > bottom= >> > : 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">If an ARC review was too much >> trouble > for = >> > the Service Tags team, what does that say about depending on >> such > a f= >> > acility?
> 0px; > margi= >> > n-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; min-height: 14px; >> ">
DIV>
> > tyle=3D"margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: >> 0px; > margi= >> > n-left: 0px; ">Lloyd
> margin- > right= >> > : 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; min-height: >> 14px; > ">
= >> >
> margin- > bottom= >> > : 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">On Jun 15, 2007, at 4:11 AM, >> James > Carlson= >> > wrote:
> 0px; > margin= >> > -bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; min-height: 14px; ">
> DIV> > > > QUOTE type=3D"cite">
> right: > 0px;= >> > margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">Lloyd L. >> Chambers > writes:> > IV>
> 0px; > margin-r= >> > ight: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">> > class=3D"App= >> > le-converted-space">=A0 =A0 This project >> introduces > support fo= >> > r Service Tags in Glassfish, using the
> style=3D"margin- > top:= >> > 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: >> 0px; > ">> > N class=3D"Apple-converted-space">=A0 =A0 Service >> Tag > Registry= >> > client. Service Tag Registry is a local repository >> containing DIV><= >> > DIV style=3D"margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin- >> bottom: > 0px; = >> > margin-left: 0px; ">> space">=A0 =A0 > > > PAN>a list of product instances installed on a system. Refer >> to > ARC c= >> > ase
> margin- > bot= >> > tom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">> converted- > space">= >> > =A0 =A0 PSARC/2006/683/ for details of the Service >> Tags > projec= >> > t. With this support built
> 0px; > margin= >> > -right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; >> "> class=3D"A= >> > pple-converted-space">=A0 =A0 in, Glassfish installer >> will > reg= >> > ister Glassfish in the Service Tag Registry, during> DIV>
> > =3D"margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: >> 0px; > margin-le= >> > ft: 0px; ">=A0 =A0 >> SPAN>insta= >> > llation.
> margin- > rig= >> > ht: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; min-height: >> 14px; > ">> > R>
> margin- > bott= >> > om: 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">Given that it's dependent on >> > 2006/683, t= >> > his project may have a bit of
> 0px; > mar= >> > gin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">a >> process > pro= >> > blem.=A0 The >> project > tea= >> > m for 2006/683 did not complete ARC
> style=3D"margin- > top: 0p= >> > x; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: >> 0px; > ">review = >> > and the product seems to have shipped without it.
> style= >> > =3D"margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: >> 0px; > margin-le= >> > ft: 0px; min-height: 14px; ">
>> style=3D"margin-to= >> > p: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: >> 0px; > ">Su= >> > n Microsystems / 1 Network Drive > converted- > space= >> > ">=A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 71.232W > converted- > space= >> > ">=A0 Vox +1 781 442 2084
> top: > 0px; = >> > margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; >> ">MS > UBUR02-= >> > 212 / Burlington MA 01803-2757 > converted- > space">= >> > =A0 42.496N =A0 >> SPAN>F= >> > ax +1 781 442 1677
> top: > 0px; = >> > margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; >> min- > height: = >> > 14px; ">
> 0px; > margin= >> > -right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; min- >> height: > 14px; = >> > ">

>> > >> > --Boundary_(ID_UAYIh4wcDd3D1P4TjZ86oQ)-- >> > >> >> > From sacadmin Fri Jun 15 16:35:34 2007 Received: from sfbaymail2sca.sfbay.sun.com (sfbaymail2sca.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.145.155.42]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l5FNZYje011665 for ; Fri, 15 Jun 2007 16:35:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sca-es-mail-2.sun.com (sca-es-mail-2.Sun.COM [192.18.43.133]) by sfbaymail2sca.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.6+Sun/8.12.10/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l5FNY0un010229 for ; Fri, 15 Jun 2007 16:34:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from fe-sfbay-10.sun.com ([192.18.43.129]) by sca-es-mail-2.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id l5FNXtma000221 for ; Fri, 15 Jun 2007 16:33:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from conversion-daemon.fe-sfbay-10.sun.com by fe-sfbay-10.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-8.04 (built Feb 28 2007)) id <0JJP00L01ASELH00@fe-sfbay-10.sun.com> (original mail from Lloyd.Chambers@Sun.COM) for WSARC@sac.sfbay.sun.com; Fri, 15 Jun 2007 16:33:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.1.8] ([129.150.16.61]) by fe-sfbay-10.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-8.04 (built Feb 28 2007)) with ESMTPSA id <0JJP00L7SASIAO00@fe-sfbay-10.sun.com>; Fri, 15 Jun 2007 16:33:55 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2007 16:33:53 -0700 From: Lloyd L Chambers Subject: Re: WSARC/2007/351 FastTrack GlassFish Service tags In-reply-to: <200706152254.l5FMsLfN019372@aha.red.iplanet.com> Sender: Lloyd.Chambers@Sun.COM To: WSARC@sac.sfbay.sun.com Cc: Siraj Ghaffar , Tim Marsland , Robert Brewin Message-id: MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.752.3) Content-type: text/plain; format=flowed; delsp=yes; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT References: <200706152254.l5FMsLfN019372@aha.red.iplanet.com> Status: RO Content-Length: 27517 Chris, Good points, but what does the unwitting GlassFish team do? Remove support for Service Tags? Wait months (or forever) for the problem to be solved? The GlassFish team is in an untenable situation. We have garbage-in, so maybe garbage-out is the solution: ignore the fundamental problem and approve the case with grumbling in the mail log. Lloyd On Jun 15, 2007, at 3:54 PM, Chris Kasso wrote: > From: Edward Hunter > Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2007 15:19:51 -0700 > > Granted we can't be sure, given that the PSARC case did not > complete, > whether or not there are other > issues lurking. However, the main bone of contention was around > secure > by default. ST wanted > to not be held to that security policy. The ARC objected. > Management > decided that the policy did > not apply in this case. Rather than let the case complete with that > caveat they just waived the whole > process. (I'm probably leaving out a bunch of detail here.) > > I reviewed the PSARC mail log and could not conclude what the real > issues > were. I contacted the PSARC case owner - Kais Belgaied to which he > replied: > >> PSARC/2006/683 had a inception then a first commitment review, >> but there was no vote. A number of issues have been identified and >> should be >> addressed before commitment. > > In order to support Java ES the ST folks have created new RPM's > for the Linux impl as well as a new Java API which required additional > pkgs to be created. As far as I know there is no near-term plan for > these new interfaces to be reviewed by any ARC - so this adds > additional > risk to those components consuming these new interfaces. > > Now, the thing we're dealing with here is a fasttrack. So, unless > someone wants to derail it the question > we're trying to cover is is the consuming of these interfaces > from this > other case (PSARC/2006/683) a small enough change > not to warrant a full review. My sense is modulo the fact that a > full > review might turn up things on the PSARC > side that what they are consuming is probably okay. > > From a process perspective one way to handle this is to assert that > since the interfaces are not "approved" they > are therefore private and require a contract. That stays within the > process boundaries and does not create a bunch > of weird artifacts while we try to explain this. > > The contract addresses part of the problem - the interface > consumers and > producer will be cognizant of each other and thus reduces the > possibility > of breakage later - it does not address the situation where the > ST project may be doing something fundamentally wrong that when > shipped > exposes Sun and/or our customers to risk and, given the newly > established > dependencies on ST by 60 products becomes difficult to fix without > costing > Sun significant resources. > > So, if I were going to modify this fasttrack that's what I would do. > Glassfish needs either a contract or some > assurance that ST will let them know before things change. That's > actually a reasonable request since there is > no indication based on the management decision that ST will ever > come > back to the ARC. Since they would > then have to complete their first case. Since the contract is > meant to > force them to consider their consumers > that would probably be a good thing given the current state. > > I disagree. I guess I'm less trusting that the ST architecture is > sound. > Contracts do not ensure the architecture is sound. > > Here's a case where we have a broad Sun initative to support > Service Tags > yet for whatever reason we are looking for ways to hand wave around > the > fact that the base functionality has not been ARC approved. What's > wrong > with this picture? > > I'd much prefer the ST folks be sent back to PSARC to work out some > agreement with them. Let's get an ARC to bless this stuff before > we end up in a situation we may regret. > > Chris > > I'm less concerned about the form of the contract although having > one in > the case directory would be good. I'm > more concerned with the intent in that both parties understand this > connection exists and needs to be managed. > > An observation on Pat's response to the initial question. One > way to > view that is that the ST team has basically > taken on the responsibility of the ARC process since they have > chosen to > manage the expectations of the 60 products > they are dealing with in terms of the interfaces they provide. > Otherwise, there is a big chance for things to go wrong here. > Essentially, they are creating contracts with all the consumers > of ST > and managing those. On the one hand that's good. > On the other hand it would be good to know that they explicitly > signed > up for that and understand the implications. > -edh > > Chris Kasso wrote: >> I reread the standard wording I suggested we use and I realize the >> error here is that the ST project has already been delivered (without >> approval). So indicating this project can not be delivered before >> the other project doesn't really express the true nature of the >> problem. >> (It implicitly assumes the other case would never be delivered >> without >> first getting ARC approval) >> >> We could modifiy the wording to: >> >> The project depends on the following other project and may not be >> delivered before PSARC/2006/683 Service Tag is approved. >> >> Now in theory when the GF PAC is reviewing their release criteria it >> should be identified to them that while all the GF ARC cases have >> been approved the above condition was established by the ARC. >> >> The PAC will either realize the significant risk this creates for the >> project and thus apply pressure to the ST folks to have their case >> approved so as GF can ship *or* the PAC will ignore the condition >> because there is perceived pressure to get ST support out and they'll >> note that the Solaris PAC granted a waiver to bring ST support into >> S10 U4. >> >> Our job is to point out when these conditions exist so that bad >> things >> don't happen but we very much depend on management to behave in >> a responsible way. They have to evaluate the risks vs the need to >> ship product. Our job also tends to be to fix problems created >> by their choices. >> >> Chris >> >> From: Lloyd L Chambers >> Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2007 13:14:04 -0700 >> >> Chris (and WSARC), >> >> Siraj has suggested modifying the language to read: >> >> "The project depends on the following other project and may >> not be >> delivered before it: PSARC/2006/683 Service Tag" >> >> I'll modify the one-pager that way. >> >> HOWEVER, I think it's a non-solution, because in theory it means >> GlassFish can't ship until the PSARC case is approved. From what I >> understand from from Pat Ryan (below), the case has been *exempted* >> and *will not* be approved. >> >> How does a language change alter the reality other than as a feel >> good solution? I think it undermines the value and authority of >> the >> ARC process to *pretend* that things are kosher. Better to approve >> it and explicitly state the problem as part of the approval. >> >> Lloyd >> >> On Jun 15, 2007, at 9:42 AM, Chris Kasso wrote: >> >>>> Additionally we are working with 14 other engagements with over 60 >>>> products >>>> to be released in the next two quarters. >>> >>> This only reinforces the need for 2006/683 to get approval. If >>> there >>> are problems with 2006/683 they are only going to be magnified as >>> these other 60 products are shipped with dependencies on 2006/683. >>> >>> I think this case can move forward but it needs the standard text: >>> >>>> The project depends on the following other project and may >>>> not be delivered before it... >>> >>> Chris >>> >>> From: Lloyd L Chambers >>> Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2007 09:29:08 -0700 >>> >>> [forwarding so it is seen by WSARC members, and goes into the >>> mail log] >>> >>> Begin forwarded message: >>> >>> From: Pat Ryan >>> Date: June 15, 2007 9:26:01 AM PDT >>> To: Siraj Ghaffar >>> Cc: Brandon E Taylor , Lloyd L Chambers >>> , Abhijit Kumar >>> Subject: Re: [Fwd: Re: GlassFish V2 Service Tag Support [WSARC/ >>> 2007/351 FastTrack timeout 06/21/2007]] >>> >>> Siraj, >>> >>> Service Tags started the ARC process and met with PSARC two times >>> (2006/683). Service Tags were then exempted from ARC Approval >>> requirements by the Solaris PTeam and PAC. At that time, PSARC >>> requested that SysNet file an umbrella case providing an >>> overview of >>> the entire Sun Connection product from SysNet including the >>> Service >>> Tag case. The one pager has been submitted - 2007/330. >>> >>> At this time Service Tags 1.0 are integrated into Solaris 10U4 and >>> ILOM2. Both of which will release in July. Additionally we are >>> working with 14 other engagements with over 60 products to be >>> released in the next two quarters. Attached is a presentation >>> from >>> SysNet's VP that shows the committments made by product teams to >>> integrate with Service Tags. 50% of Sun's revenue products will >>> have Service Tags 1.0 integrated by the end of FY'07. >>> >>> Regards, >>> Pat >>> >>> >>> Siraj Ghaffar wrote: >>>> Hi Pat, Brandon, >>>> Has the Service Tag project not gone through the ARC process? We >>>> have issues going through WSARC as the Glassfish support for >>>> Service Tags depends on the Service Tags project. >>>> >>>> Thanks >>>> >>>> >>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>> -- >>>> - >>>> -- >>>> >>>> Subject: >>>> Re: GlassFish V2 Service Tag Support [WSARC/2007/351 FastTrack >>>> timeout 06/21/2007] >>>> From: >>>> Lloyd L Chambers >>>> Date: >>>> Fri, 15 Jun 2007 08:49:54 -0700 >>>> To: >>>> James Carlson , Siraj Ghaffar >>>> >>>> >>>> To: >>>> James Carlson , Siraj Ghaffar >>>> >>>> CC: >>>> WSARC@sac.sfbay.sun.com >>>> >>>> >>>> James, >>>> >>>> Thank you. >>>> >>>> SIRAJ, why are we depending on a facility that did not complete an >>>> ARC review? >>>> >>>> If an ARC review was too much trouble for the Service Tags team, >>>> what does that say about depending on such a facility? >>>> >>>> Lloyd >>>> >>>> On Jun 15, 2007, at 4:11 AM, James Carlson wrote: >>>> >>>>> Lloyd L. Chambers writes: >>>>>> This project introduces support for Service Tags in >>>>>> Glassfish, using the >>>>>> Service Tag Registry client. Service Tag Registry is a local >>>>>> repository containing >>>>>> a list of product instances installed on a system. Refer to >>>>>> ARC case >>>>>> PSARC/2006/683/ for details of the Service Tags project. With >>>>>> this support built >>>>>> in, Glassfish installer will register Glassfish in the >>>>>> Service Tag Registry, during >>>>>> installation. >>>>> >>>>> Given that it's dependent on 2006/683, this project may have a >>>>> bit of >>>>> a process problem. The project team for 2006/683 did not complete >>>>> ARC >>>>> review and the product seems to have shipped without it. >>>>> >>>>> --James Carlson, Solaris Networking >>>>> >>>>> Sun Microsystems / 1 Network Drive 71.232W Vox +1 781 >>>>> 442 2084 >>>>> MS UBUR02-212 / Burlington MA 01803-2757 42.496N Fax +1 781 >>>>> 442 1677 >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> --Boundary_(ID_UAYIh4wcDd3D1P4TjZ86oQ) >>> Content-type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 >>> Content-transfer-encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE >>> >>> >> space; = >>> -khtml-line-break: after-white-space; ">[forwarding so it is seen >>> by = >>> WSARC members, and goes into the mail log]

Begin >>> for= >>> warded message:

>> sty= >>> le=3D"margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; >>> margin-= >>> left: 0px; ">>> color=3D"#000000" st= >>> yle=3D"font: 12.0px Helvetica; color: #000000">From: >> FONT>>> ONT face=3D"Helvetica" size=3D"3" style=3D"font: 12.0px >>> Helvetica">Pa= >>> t Ryan <Pat.Ryan@Sun.COM>> A>&g= >>> t;
>> marg= >>> in-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">>> =3D"3" color=3D"#000000" style=3D"font: 12.0px Helvetica; color: >>> #000= >>> 000">Date: >> style= >>> =3D"font: 12.0px Helvetica">June 15, 2007 9:26:01 AM PDT>> DIV>= >>>
>> 0px; ma= >>> rgin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">>> face= >>> =3D"Helvetica" size=3D"3" color=3D"#000000" style=3D"font: 12.0px >>> Hel= >>> vetica; color: #000000">Cc: >> face=3D"Helvetica" si= >>> ze=3D"3" style=3D"font: 12.0px Helvetica">Brandon E Taylor <>> hre= >>> f=3D"mailto:Brandon.Taylor@Sun.COM">Brandon.Taylor@Sun.COM>> A>>, L= >>> loyd L Chambers <>> href=3D"mailto:Lloyd.Chambers@Sun.COM">Lloyd.C= >>> hambers@Sun.COM>, Abhijit Kumar <>> href=3D"mailto:Abhijit.= >>> Kumar@Sun.COM">Abhijit.Kumar@Sun.COM>
>> style= >>> =3D"margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; >>> margin-le= >>> ft: 0px; ">>> styl= >>> e=3D"font: 12.0px Helvetica; color: #000000">Subject: >> FONT><= >>> FONT face=3D"Helvetica" size=3D"3" style=3D"font: 12.0px >>> Helvetica"><= >>> B>Re: [Fwd: Re: GlassFish V2 Service Tag Support [WSARC/2007/351 >>> Fast= >>> Track timeout 06/21/2007]]
>> top: = >>> 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; min- >>> hei= >>> ght: 14px; ">
>> right: = >>> 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">Siraj,
>> style= >>> =3D"margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; >>> margin-le= >>> ft: 0px; min-height: 14px; ">
>> 0px;= >>> margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; >>> ">Service T= >>> ags started the ARC process and met with PSARC two times >>> (2006/683).<= >>> SPAN class=3D"Apple-converted-space">=A0 Service Tags were >>> the= >>> n exempted from ARC Approval requirements by the Solaris PTeam >>> and PA= >>> C.=A0 At that >>> time,>> class=3D"Apple-converted-space">=A0 PSARC requested that >>> SysN= >>> et file an umbrella case providing an overview of the entire Sun >>> Conn= >>> ection product from SysNet including the Service Tag case.>> class= >>> =3D"Apple-converted-space">=A0 =A0 The one pager has been >>> subm= >>> itted - 2007/330.
>> right: 0= >>> px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; min-height: 14px; >>> ">
>> IV>
>> bottom: 0= >>> px; margin-left: 0px; ">At this time Service Tags 1.0 are >>> integrated = >>> into Solaris 10U4 and ILOM2.>> space">= >>> =A0 Both of which will release in July.>> class=3D"Apple-co= >>> nverted-space">=A0 Additionally we are working with 14 >>> other e= >>> ngagements with over 60 products to be released in the next two >>> quart= >>> ers.=A0 Attached is >>> a pr= >>> esentation from SysNet's VP that shows>> converted-= >>> space">=A0 the committments made by product teams to >>> integrate= >>> with Service Tags. =A0 >> SPAN>= >>> 50% of Sun's revenue products will have Service Tags 1.0 >>> integrated b= >>> y the end of FY'07.
>> right:= >>> 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; min-height: 14px; >>> ">
<= >>> /DIV>
>> bottom:= >>> 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">Regards,
>> 0px= >>> ; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">Pat>> DIV= >>>>
>>> 0px= >>> ; margin-left: 0px; min-height: 14px; ">
>> style=3D"margi= >>> n-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: >>> 0px; = >>> min-height: 14px; ">
>> margin-r= >>> ight: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">Siraj Ghaffar >>> wrot= >>> e:
>> mar= >>> gin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">Hi Pat, >>> Brand= >>> on,
>> bot= >>> tom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">Has the Service Tag project not >>> gone th= >>> rough the ARC process? We have issues going through WSARC as the >>> Glas= >>> sfish support for Service Tags depends on the Service Tags >>> project.>> DIV>
>> bottom: = >>> 0px; margin-left: 0px; min-height: 14px; ">
>> style=3D"ma= >>> rgin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin- >>> left: 0p= >>> x; ">Thanks
>> 0px; ma= >>> rgin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; min-height: 14px; ">
> >>> DIV>>> >>> V style=3D"margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: >>> 0px; ma= >>> rgin-left: 0px; min-height: 14px; ">
>> style=3D"margin-to= >>> p: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; >>> ">--= >>> >>> -------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> -= >>> -
>> botto= >>> m: 0px; margin-left: 0px; min-height: 14px; ">
>> style= >>> =3D"margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; >>> margin-le= >>> ft: 0px; ">Subject:
>> right:= >>> 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">Re: GlassFish V2 >>> Servic= >>> e Tag Support [WSARC/2007/351 FastTrack timeout 06/21/2007]>> DIV>>> style=3D"margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; >>> mar= >>> gin-left: 0px; ">From:
>> rig= >>> ht: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">Lloyd L Chambers >>> <= >>> ;>> href=3D"mailto:Lloyd.Chambers@Sun.COM">Lloyd.Chambers@Sun.COM= >>> >
>> margin-bo= >>> ttom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">Date:
>> top: 0= >>> px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; >>> ">Fri, 1= >>> 5 Jun 2007 08:49:54 -0700
>> margin-= >>> right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">To:
>> sty= >>> le=3D"margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; >>> margin-= >>> left: 0px; ">James Carlson <>> href=3D"mailto:James.D.Carlson@Sun.= >>> COM">James.D.Carlson@Sun.COM>, Siraj Ghaffar <>> href=3D"ma= >>> ilto:Siraj.Ghaffar@Sun.COM">Siraj.Ghaffar@Sun.COM>>> DIV>
>> tyle=3D"margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; >>> margi= >>> n-left: 0px; min-height: 14px; ">
>> top: = >>> 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; >>> ">To:>> DIV>
>> bottom: = >>> 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">James Carlson <>> href=3D"mailto:James.D.= >>> Carlson@Sun.COM">James.D.Carlson@Sun.COM>, Siraj Ghaffar >>> <<= >>> A href=3D"mailto:Siraj.Ghaffar@Sun.COM">Siraj.Ghaffar@Sun.COM>> A>>= >>>
>> bottom= >>> : 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">CC:
>> 0px; ma= >>> rgin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">>> href=3D"m= >>> ailto:WSARC@sac.sfbay.sun.com">WSARC@sac.sfbay.sun.com>> DIV>
>> style=3D"margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; >>> marg= >>> in-left: 0px; min-height: 14px; ">
>> top:= >>> 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; >>> min-he= >>> ight: 14px; ">
>> right: = >>> 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">James,
>> style= >>> =3D"margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; >>> margin-le= >>> ft: 0px; min-height: 14px; ">
>> 0px;= >>> margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">Thank >>> you= >>> .
>> botto= >>> m: 0px; margin-left: 0px; min-height: 14px; ">
>> style= >>> =3D"margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; >>> margin-le= >>> ft: 0px; ">SIRAJ, why are we depending on a facility that did not >>> com= >>> plete an ARC review?
>> right= >>> : 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; min-height: 14px; >>> ">
= >>>
>> bottom= >>> : 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">If an ARC review was too much trouble >>> for = >>> the Service Tags team, what does that say about depending on such >>> a f= >>> acility?
>> margi= >>> n-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; min-height: 14px; ">
>> DIV>
>> tyle=3D"margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; >>> margi= >>> n-left: 0px; ">Lloyd
>> right= >>> : 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; min-height: 14px; >>> ">
= >>>
>> bottom= >>> : 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">On Jun 15, 2007, at 4:11 AM, James >>> Carlson= >>> wrote:
>> margin= >>> -bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; min-height: 14px; ">
>>> >> QUOTE type=3D"cite">
>> 0px;= >>> margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">Lloyd L. Chambers >>> writes:>> IV>
>> margin-r= >>> ight: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">>> class=3D"App= >>> le-converted-space">=A0 =A0 This project introduces >>> support fo= >>> r Service Tags in Glassfish, using the
>> top:= >>> 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; >>> ">>> N class=3D"Apple-converted-space">=A0 =A0 Service Tag >>> Registry= >>> client. Service Tag Registry is a local repository containing>> DIV><= >>> DIV style=3D"margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: >>> 0px; = >>> margin-left: 0px; ">=A0 =A0 >>> >> PAN>a list of product instances installed on a system. Refer to >>> ARC c= >>> ase
>> bot= >>> tom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">>> space">= >>> =A0 =A0 PSARC/2006/683/ for details of the Service Tags >>> projec= >>> t. With this support built
>> margin= >>> -right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">>> class=3D"A= >>> pple-converted-space">=A0 =A0 in, Glassfish installer will >>> reg= >>> ister Glassfish in the Service Tag Registry, during
>> style= >>> =3D"margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; >>> margin-le= >>> ft: 0px; ">=A0 =A0 >> SPAN>insta= >>> llation.
>> rig= >>> ht: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; min-height: 14px; >>> ">>> R>
>> bott= >>> om: 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">Given that it's dependent on >>> 2006/683, t= >>> his project may have a bit of
>> mar= >>> gin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">a process >>> pro= >>> blem.=A0 The project >>> tea= >>> m for 2006/683 did not complete ARC
>> top: 0p= >>> x; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; >>> ">review = >>> and the product seems to have shipped without it.
>> =3D"margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; >>> margin-le= >>> ft: 0px; min-height: 14px; ">
>> 0px;= >>> margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">-- >>> James C= >>> arlson, Solaris Networking>> space">=A0 = >>> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 <>> href=3D"mailto:james.d.carlson@= >>> sun.com">james.d.carlson@sun.com>
>> style=3D"margin-to= >>> p: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; >>> ">Su= >>> n Microsystems / 1 Network Drive >> space= >>> ">=A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 71.232W >> space= >>> ">=A0 Vox +1 781 442 2084
>> 0px; = >>> margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">MS >>> UBUR02-= >>> 212 / Burlington MA 01803-2757 >> space">= >>> =A0 42.496N =A0 >> SPAN>F= >>> ax +1 781 442 1677
>> 0px; = >>> margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; min- >>> height: = >>> 14px; ">
>> margin= >>> -right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; min-height: >>> 14px; = >>> ">

>>> >>> --Boundary_(ID_UAYIh4wcDd3D1P4TjZ86oQ)-- >>> >> >> >> > > From sacadmin Fri Jun 15 16:49:10 2007 Received: from sfbaymail2sca.sfbay.sun.com (sfbaymail2sca.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.145.155.42]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l5FNnACr011759 for ; Fri, 15 Jun 2007 16:49:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sca-es-mail-1.sun.com (sca-es-mail-1.Sun.COM [192.18.43.132]) by sfbaymail2sca.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.6+Sun/8.12.10/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l5FNlbXe016855 for ; Fri, 15 Jun 2007 16:47:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: from fe-sfbay-09.sun.com ([192.18.43.129]) by sca-es-mail-1.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id l5FNlV9Y002936 for ; Fri, 15 Jun 2007 16:47:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: from conversion-daemon.fe-sfbay-09.sun.com by fe-sfbay-09.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-8.04 (built Feb 28 2007)) id <0JJP00201BB1ZT00@fe-sfbay-09.sun.com> (original mail from Ed.Hunter@Sun.COM) for WSARC@sac.sfbay.sun.com; Fri, 15 Jun 2007 16:47:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [129.145.154.102] by fe-sfbay-09.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-8.04 (built Feb 28 2007)) with ESMTPSA id <0JJP00E8FBF2KDF0@fe-sfbay-09.sun.com>; Fri, 15 Jun 2007 16:47:26 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2007 16:47:26 -0700 From: Ed.Hunter@Sun.COM Subject: Re: WSARC/2007/351 FastTrack GlassFish Service tags In-reply-to: Sender: Ed.Hunter@Sun.COM To: Lloyd L Chambers Cc: WSARC@sac.sfbay.sun.com, Siraj Ghaffar , Tim Marsland , Robert Brewin Message-id: <4673250E.4070209@Sun.COM> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-Accept-Language: en-us, en References: <200706152144.l5FLix1X018964@aha.red.iplanet.com> <46731087.6040808@sun.com> User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; SunOS sun4v; en-US; rv:1.7) Gecko/20060727 Status: RO Content-Length: 28790 True, that's implied in my last two paragraphs where I said I'm less concerned about the form of the contract and that the ST people have implicitly taken on this function. Put another way the question is does Glassfish understand what they are getting into? Conversely, does ST understand what they are getting into. Contracts force those questions to be asked and answered and leave a record of the decision. While that record is nice I'm trying to make sure the conversation has happened. Paul's mail implies that it has. I'm just confirming that the consumers (Glassfish) agree. There's a parallel conversation which is Chris' last response. If the ST ARC waiver is permanent then we should know that. It it's not then we should know when they plan to complete the process. I'm checking on that part now. -edh Lloyd L Chambers wrote On 06/15/07 04:29 PM,: >Ed, > >If 60 products depend on the Service Tags interfaces, why single out >GlassFish for a contract? The problem seems far larger than just >GlassFish. If GlassFish does a contract and the other 59 products do >not, it seems like a complete waste of time. > >Lloyd > >On Jun 15, 2007, at 3:19 PM, Edward Hunter wrote: > > > >>Granted we can't be sure, given that the PSARC case did not >>complete, whether or not there are other >>issues lurking. However, the main bone of contention was around >>secure by default. ST wanted >>to not be held to that security policy. The ARC objected. >>Management decided that the policy did >>not apply in this case. Rather than let the case complete with >>that caveat they just waived the whole >>process. (I'm probably leaving out a bunch of detail here.) >> >>Now, the thing we're dealing with here is a fasttrack. So, unless >>someone wants to derail it the question >>we're trying to cover is is the consuming of these interfaces from >>this other case (PSARC/2006/683) a small enough change >>not to warrant a full review. My sense is modulo the fact that a >>full review might turn up things on the PSARC >>side that what they are consuming is probably okay. >>From a process perspective one way to handle this is to assert that >>since the interfaces are not "approved" they >>are therefore private and require a contract. That stays within >>the process boundaries and does not create a bunch >>of weird artifacts while we try to explain this. >>So, if I were going to modify this fasttrack that's what I would >>do. Glassfish needs either a contract or some >>assurance that ST will let them know before things change. That's >>actually a reasonable request since there is >>no indication based on the management decision that ST will ever >>come back to the ARC. Since they would >>then have to complete their first case. Since the contract is >>meant to force them to consider their consumers >>that would probably be a good thing given the current state. >> >>I'm less concerned about the form of the contract although having >>one in the case directory would be good. I'm >>more concerned with the intent in that both parties understand this >>connection exists and needs to be managed. >> >>An observation on Pat's response to the initial question. One way >>to view that is that the ST team has basically >>taken on the responsibility of the ARC process since they have >>chosen to manage the expectations of the 60 products >>they are dealing with in terms of the interfaces they provide. >>Otherwise, there is a big chance for things to go wrong here. >>Essentially, they are creating contracts with all the consumers of >>ST and managing those. On the one hand that's good. >>On the other hand it would be good to know that they explicitly >>signed up for that and understand the implications. >>-edh >> >>Chris Kasso wrote: >> >> >>>I reread the standard wording I suggested we use and I realize the >>>error here is that the ST project has already been delivered (without >>>approval). So indicating this project can not be delivered before >>>the other project doesn't really express the true nature of the >>>problem. >>>(It implicitly assumes the other case would never be delivered >>>without >>>first getting ARC approval) >>>We could modifiy the wording to: >>> >>>The project depends on the following other project and may not be >>>delivered before PSARC/2006/683 Service Tag is approved. >>> >>>Now in theory when the GF PAC is reviewing their release criteria it >>>should be identified to them that while all the GF ARC cases have >>>been approved the above condition was established by the ARC. >>> >>>The PAC will either realize the significant risk this creates for the >>>project and thus apply pressure to the ST folks to have their case >>>approved so as GF can ship *or* the PAC will ignore the condition >>>because there is perceived pressure to get ST support out and they'll >>>note that the Solaris PAC granted a waiver to bring ST support into >>>S10 U4. >>> >>>Our job is to point out when these conditions exist so that bad >>>things >>>don't happen but we very much depend on management to behave in >>>a responsible way. They have to evaluate the risks vs the need to >>>ship product. Our job also tends to be to fix problems created >>>by their choices. >>> >>>Chris >>> >>> From: Lloyd L Chambers >>> Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2007 13:14:04 -0700 >>> >>> Chris (and WSARC), >>> Siraj has suggested modifying the language to read: >>> "The project depends on the following other project and may >>>not be delivered before it: PSARC/2006/683 Service Tag" >>> I'll modify the one-pager that way. >>> HOWEVER, I think it's a non-solution, because in theory it >>>means GlassFish can't ship until the PSARC case is approved. >>>From what I understand from from Pat Ryan (below), the case has >>>been *exempted* and *will not* be approved. >>> How does a language change alter the reality other than as a >>>feel good solution? I think it undermines the value and >>>authority of the ARC process to *pretend* that things are >>>kosher. Better to approve it and explicitly state the problem >>>as part of the approval. >>> Lloyd >>> On Jun 15, 2007, at 9:42 AM, Chris Kasso wrote: >>> >> Additionally we are working with 14 other engagements with >>>over 60 >> products >>> >> to be released in the next two quarters. >>> > >>> > This only reinforces the need for 2006/683 to get approval. >>>If there >>> > are problems with 2006/683 they are only going to be magnified as >>> > these other 60 products are shipped with dependencies on >>>2006/683. >>> > >>> > I think this case can move forward but it needs the standard >>>text: >>> > >>> >> The project depends on the following other project and may >>> >> not be delivered before it... >>> > >>> > Chris >>> > >>> > From: Lloyd L Chambers >>> > Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2007 09:29:08 -0700 >>> > >>> > [forwarding so it is seen by WSARC members, and goes into >>>the > mail log] >>> > >>> > Begin forwarded message: >>> > >>> > From: Pat Ryan >>> > Date: June 15, 2007 9:26:01 AM PDT >>> > To: Siraj Ghaffar >>> > Cc: Brandon E Taylor , Lloyd L Chambers >>> > , Abhijit Kumar >>> > Subject: Re: [Fwd: Re: GlassFish V2 Service Tag Support [WSARC/ >>> > 2007/351 FastTrack timeout 06/21/2007]] >>> > >>> > Siraj, >>> > >>> > Service Tags started the ARC process and met with PSARC two >>>times >>> > (2006/683). Service Tags were then exempted from ARC Approval >>> > requirements by the Solaris PTeam and PAC. At that time, >>>PSARC >>> > requested that SysNet file an umbrella case providing an >>>overview of >>> > the entire Sun Connection product from SysNet including the >>>Service >>> > Tag case. The one pager has been submitted - 2007/330. >>> > >>> > At this time Service Tags 1.0 are integrated into Solaris >>>10U4 and >>> > ILOM2. Both of which will release in July. Additionally we >>>are >>> > working with 14 other engagements with over 60 products to be >>> > released in the next two quarters. Attached is a >>>presentation from >>> > SysNet's VP that shows the committments made by product >>>teams to >>> > integrate with Service Tags. 50% of Sun's revenue products >>>will >>> > have Service Tags 1.0 integrated by the end of FY'07. >>> > >>> > Regards, >>> > Pat >>> > >>> > >>> > Siraj Ghaffar wrote: >>> >> Hi Pat, Brandon, >>> >> Has the Service Tag project not gone through the ARC process? We >>> >> have issues going through WSARC as the Glassfish support for >>> >> Service Tags depends on the Service Tags project. >>> >> >>> >> Thanks >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> >>>--------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> >> - >>> >> -- >>> >> >>> >> Subject: >>> >> Re: GlassFish V2 Service Tag Support [WSARC/2007/351 FastTrack >>> >> timeout 06/21/2007] >>> >> From: >>> >> Lloyd L Chambers >>> >> Date: >>> >> Fri, 15 Jun 2007 08:49:54 -0700 >>> >> To: >>> >> James Carlson , Siraj Ghaffar >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> To: >>> >> James Carlson , Siraj Ghaffar >>> >> >>> >> CC: >>> >> WSARC@sac.sfbay.sun.com >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> James, >>> >> >>> >> Thank you. >>> >> >>> >> SIRAJ, why are we depending on a facility that did not >>>complete an >>> >> ARC review? >>> >> >>> >> If an ARC review was too much trouble for the Service Tags team, >>> >> what does that say about depending on such a facility? >>> >> >>> >> Lloyd >>> >> >>> >> On Jun 15, 2007, at 4:11 AM, James Carlson wrote: >>> >> >>> >>> Lloyd L. Chambers writes: >>> >>>> This project introduces support for Service Tags in >>> >>>> Glassfish, using the >>> >>>> Service Tag Registry client. Service Tag Registry is a >>>local >>> >>>> repository containing >>> >>>> a list of product instances installed on a system. >>>Refer to >>> >>>> ARC case >>> >>>> PSARC/2006/683/ for details of the Service Tags >>>project. With >>> >>>> this support built >>> >>>> in, Glassfish installer will register Glassfish in the >>> >>>> Service Tag Registry, during >>> >>>> installation. >>> >>> >>> >>> Given that it's dependent on 2006/683, this project may have >>>a >>> bit of >>> >>> a process problem. The project team for 2006/683 did not >>>complete >>> >>> ARC >>> >>> review and the product seems to have shipped without it. >>> >>> >>> >>> --James Carlson, Solaris Networking >>> >>> >>> >>> Sun Microsystems / 1 Network Drive 71.232W Vox +1 781 >>> >>> 442 2084 >>> >>> MS UBUR02-212 / Burlington MA 01803-2757 42.496N Fax +1 781 >>> >>> 442 1677 >>> >> >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > --Boundary_(ID_UAYIh4wcDd3D1P4TjZ86oQ) >>> > Content-type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 >>> > Content-transfer-encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE >>> > >>> > >>mode: > space; = >>> > -khtml-line-break: after-white-space; ">[forwarding so it is >>>seen > by = >>> > WSARC members, and goes into the mail log] >>>

Begin > for= >>> > warded message:

>>newline">
sty= >>> > le=3D"margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: >>>0px; > margin-= >>> > left: 0px; "> >>>color=3D"#000000" st= >>> > yle=3D"font: 12.0px Helvetica; color: #000000">From: >>B> FONT>>> > ONT face=3D"Helvetica" size=3D"3" style=3D"font: 12.0px > >>>Helvetica">Pa= >>> > t Ryan <>>href=3D"mailto:Pat.Ryan@Sun.COM">Pat.Ryan@Sun.COM A>&g= >>> > t;
>>0px; > marg= >>> > in-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">>>size= >>> > =3D"3" color=3D"#000000" style=3D"font: 12.0px Helvetica; >>>color: > #000= >>> > 000">Date: >>style= >>> > =3D"font: 12.0px Helvetica">June 15, 2007 9:26:01 AM PDT>>FONT> DIV>= >>> >
>>top: > 0px; ma= >>> > rgin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; >>>">>> > =3D"Helvetica" size=3D"3" color=3D"#000000" style=3D"font: >>>12.0px > Hel= >>> > vetica; color: #000000">Cc: >>>face=3D"Helvetica" si= >>> > ze=3D"3" style=3D"font: 12.0px Helvetica">Brandon E Taylor >>>< hre= >>> > >>>f=3D"mailto:Brandon.Taylor@Sun.COM">Brandon.Taylor@Sun.COM >>>A>>, L= >>> > loyd L Chambers < >>>href=3D"mailto:Lloyd.Chambers@Sun.COM">Lloyd.C= >>> > hambers@Sun.COM>, Abhijit Kumar < >>>href=3D"mailto:Abhijit.= >>> > Kumar@Sun.COM">Abhijit.Kumar@Sun.COM>>>DIV>
>> > =3D"margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: >>>0px; > margin-le= >>> > ft: 0px; ">>>color=3D"#000000" > styl= >>> > e=3D"font: 12.0px Helvetica; color: #000000">Subject: >>B> FONT><= >>> > FONT face=3D"Helvetica" size=3D"3" style=3D"font: 12.0px >>> >>> >>>>Helvetica"><= >>>> >>>> >>> > B>Re: [Fwd: Re: GlassFish V2 Service Tag Support [WSARC/ >>>2007/351 > Fast= >>> > Track timeout 06/21/2007]]
>>style=3D"margin- > top: = >>> > 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: >>>0px; min- > hei= >>> > ght: 14px; ">
>>margin- > right: = >>> > 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">Siraj,>>DIV>
>> > =3D"margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: >>>0px; > margin-le= >>> > ft: 0px; min-height: 14px; ">
>>top: > 0px;= >>> > margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; >>> >>> >>>>">Service T= >>>> >>>> >>> > ags started the ARC process and met with PSARC two times >>> >>> >>>>(2006/683).<= >>>> >>>> >>> > SPAN class=3D"Apple-converted-space">=A0 Service Tags >>>were > the= >>> > n exempted from ARC Approval requirements by the Solaris >>>PTeam > and PA= >>> > C.=A0 At >>>that > time,>> > class=3D"Apple-converted-space">=A0 PSARC requested >>>that > SysN= >>> > et file an umbrella case providing an overview of the entire >>>Sun > Conn= >>> > ection product from SysNet including the Service Tag >>>case. class= >>> > =3D"Apple-converted-space">=A0 =A0 The one pager has >>>been > subm= >>> > itted - 2007/330.
>>margin- > right: 0= >>> > px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; min-height: >>>14px; > ">
>> > IV>
>>margin- > bottom: 0= >>> > px; margin-left: 0px; ">At this time Service Tags 1.0 are >>> >>> >>>>integrated = >>>> >>>> >>> > into Solaris 10U4 and ILOM2.>>space">= >>> > =A0 Both of which will release in July. >>>class=3D"Apple-co= >>> > nverted-space">=A0 Additionally we are working with >>>14 > other e= >>> > ngagements with over 60 products to be released in the next >>>two > quart= >>> > ers.=A0 >>SPAN>Attached is > a pr= >>> > esentation from SysNet's VP that shows>>class=3D"Apple- > converted-= >>> > space">=A0 the committments made by product teams >>>to > integrate= >>> > with Service Tags. >>space">=A0 SPAN>= >>> > 50% of Sun's revenue products will have Service Tags 1.0 >>> >>> >>>>integrated b= >>>> >>>> >>> > y the end of FY'07.
>>margin- > right:= >>> > 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; min-height: >>>14px; > ">
<= >>> > /DIV>
>>margin- > bottom:= >>> > 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">Regards,
>>top: > 0px= >>> > ; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; >>>">Pat DIV= >>> >>
>>bottom: 0px= >>> > ; margin-left: 0px; min-height: 14px; ">
>>>style=3D"margi= >>> > n-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin- >>>left: > 0px; = >>> > min-height: 14px; ">
>>0px; > margin-r= >>> > ight: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">Siraj >>>Ghaffar > wrot= >>> > e:
>>0px; > mar= >>> > gin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">Hi >>>Pat, > Brand= >>> > on,
>>margin- > bot= >>> > tom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">Has the Service Tag project >>>not > gone th= >>> > rough the ARC process? We have issues going through WSARC as >>>the > Glas= >>> > sfish support for Service Tags depends on the Service >>>Tags > project.>> > DIV>
>>margin- > bottom: = >>> > 0px; margin-left: 0px; min-height: 14px; ">
>> >>> >>>>style=3D"ma= >>>> >>>> >>> > rgin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; >>>margin- > left: 0p= >>> > x; ">Thanks
>>right: > 0px; ma= >>> > rgin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; min-height: 14px; ">
>> >>> >>>>DIV>>>> >>>> >>>> >>> > V style=3D"margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin- >>>bottom: > 0px; ma= >>> > rgin-left: 0px; min-height: 14px; ">
>>>style=3D"margin-to= >>> > p: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: >>>0px; > ">--= >>> > > >>>--------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>= >>> > -
>>margin- > botto= >>> > m: 0px; margin-left: 0px; min-height: 14px; ">
>>style= >>> > =3D"margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: >>>0px; > margin-le= >>> > ft: 0px; ">Subject:
>>margin- > right:= >>> > 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">Re: GlassFish >>>V2 > Servic= >>> > e Tag Support [WSARC/2007/351 FastTrack timeout 06/21/2007] >>> DIV>>> > style=3D"margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: >>>0px; > mar= >>> > gin-left: 0px; ">From:
>>margin- > rig= >>> > ht: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">Lloyd L >>>Chambers > <= >>> > ; >>>href=3D"mailto:Lloyd.Chambers@Sun.COM">Lloyd.Chambers@Sun.COM= >>> > >
>>0px; > margin-bo= >>> > ttom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">Date:
>>style=3D"margin- > top: 0= >>> > px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: >>>0px; > ">Fri, 1= >>> > 5 Jun 2007 08:49:54 -0700
>>0px; > margin-= >>> > right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">To:>>DIV>
sty= >>> > le=3D"margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: >>>0px; > margin-= >>> > left: 0px; ">James Carlson < >>>href=3D"mailto:James.D.Carlson@Sun.= >>> > COM">James.D.Carlson@Sun.COM>, Siraj Ghaffar >>>< href=3D"ma= >>> > ilto:Siraj.Ghaffar@Sun.COM">Siraj.Ghaffar@Sun.COM>>A>> DIV>
>> > tyle=3D"margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: >>>0px; > margi= >>> > n-left: 0px; min-height: 14px; ">
>>style=3D"margin- > top: = >>> > 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: >>>0px; > ">To:>> > DIV>
>>margin- > bottom: = >>> > 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">James Carlson < >>>href=3D"mailto:James.D.= >>> > Carlson@Sun.COM">James.D.Carlson@Sun.COM>, Siraj >>>Ghaffar > <<= >>> > A >>>href=3D"mailto:Siraj.Ghaffar@Sun.COM">Siraj.Ghaffar@Sun.COM >>>A>>= >>> >
>>margin- > bottom= >>> > : 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">CC:
>>top: > 0px; ma= >>> > rgin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; >>>"> href=3D"m= >>> > ailto:WSARC@sac.sfbay.sun.com">WSARC@sac.sfbay.sun.com>>A> DIV>
>> > style=3D"margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: >>>0px; > marg= >>> > in-left: 0px; min-height: 14px; ">
>>style=3D"margin- > top:= >>> > 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: >>>0px; > min-he= >>> > ight: 14px; ">
>>margin- > right: = >>> > 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">James,>>DIV>
>> > =3D"margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: >>>0px; > margin-le= >>> > ft: 0px; min-height: 14px; ">
>>top: > 0px;= >>> > margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; >>>">Thank > you= >>> > .
>>margin- > botto= >>> > m: 0px; margin-left: 0px; min-height: 14px; ">
>>style= >>> > =3D"margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: >>>0px; > margin-le= >>> > ft: 0px; ">SIRAJ, why are we depending on a facility that >>>did not > com= >>> > plete an ARC review?
>>margin- > right= >>> > : 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; min-height: >>>14px; > ">
= >>> >
>>margin- > bottom= >>> > : 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">If an ARC review was too much >>>trouble > for = >>> > the Service Tags team, what does that say about depending on >>>such > a f= >>> > acility?
>>0px; > margi= >>> > n-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; min-height: 14px; >>>">
DIV>
>> > tyle=3D"margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: >>>0px; > margi= >>> > n-left: 0px; ">Lloyd
>>margin- > right= >>> > : 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; min-height: >>>14px; > ">
= >>> >
>>margin- > bottom= >>> > : 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">On Jun 15, 2007, at 4:11 AM, >>>James > Carlson= >>> > wrote:
>>0px; > margin= >>> > -bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; min-height: 14px; ">
>>DIV> > >> > QUOTE type=3D"cite">
>>right: > 0px;= >>> > margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">Lloyd L. >>>Chambers > writes:>> > IV>
>>0px; > margin-r= >>> > ight: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">>> >>> >>>>class=3D"App= >>>> >>>> >>> > le-converted-space">=A0 =A0 This project >>>introduces > support fo= >>> > r Service Tags in Glassfish, using the
>>style=3D"margin- > top:= >>> > 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: >>>0px; > ">>> > N class=3D"Apple-converted-space">=A0 =A0 Service >>>Tag > Registry= >>> > client. Service Tag Registry is a local repository >>>containing DIV><= >>> > DIV style=3D"margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin- >>>bottom: > 0px; = >>> > margin-left: 0px; ">>>space">=A0 =A0 > >> > PAN>a list of product instances installed on a system. Refer >>>to > ARC c= >>> > ase
>>margin- > bot= >>> > tom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">>>converted- > space">= >>> > =A0 =A0 PSARC/2006/683/ for details of the Service >>>Tags > projec= >>> > t. With this support built
>>0px; > margin= >>> > -right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; >>>"> class=3D"A= >>> > pple-converted-space">=A0 =A0 in, Glassfish installer >>>will > reg= >>> > ister Glassfish in the Service Tag Registry, during>>DIV>
>> > =3D"margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: >>>0px; > margin-le= >>> > ft: 0px; ">=A0 =A0 >>> SPAN>insta= >>> > llation.
>>margin- > rig= >>> > ht: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; min-height: >>>14px; > ">>> > R>
>>margin- > bott= >>> > om: 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">Given that it's dependent on >>> >>> >>>>2006/683, t= >>>> >>>> >>> > his project may have a bit of
>>0px; > mar= >>> > gin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">a >>>process > pro= >>> > blem.=A0 The >>>project > tea= >>> > m for 2006/683 did not complete ARC
>>style=3D"margin- > top: 0p= >>> > x; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: >>>0px; > ">review = >>> > and the product seems to have shipped without it.
>>style= >>> > =3D"margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: >>>0px; > margin-le= >>> > ft: 0px; min-height: 14px; ">
>>>style=3D"margin-to= >>> > p: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: >>>0px; > ">Su= >>> > n Microsystems / 1 Network Drive >>converted- > space= >>> > ">=A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 71.232W >>converted- > space= >>> > ">=A0 Vox +1 781 442 2084
>>top: > 0px; = >>> > margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; >>>">MS > UBUR02-= >>> > 212 / Burlington MA 01803-2757 >>converted- > space">= >>> > =A0 42.496N =A0 >>> SPAN>F= >>> > ax +1 781 442 1677
>>top: > 0px; = >>> > margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; >>>min- > height: = >>> > 14px; ">
>>0px; > margin= >>> > -right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; min- >>>height: > 14px; = >>> > ">

>>> > >>> > --Boundary_(ID_UAYIh4wcDd3D1P4TjZ86oQ)-- >>> > >>> >>> >>> >>> > > > From sacadmin Fri Jun 15 18:15:26 2007 Received: from sfbaymail2sca.sfbay.sun.com (sfbaymail2sca.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.145.155.42]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l5G1FQKJ013027 for ; Fri, 15 Jun 2007 18:15:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sca-es-mail-1.sun.com (sca-es-mail-1.Sun.COM [192.18.43.132]) by sfbaymail2sca.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.6+Sun/8.12.10/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l5G1DqJP016511 for ; Fri, 15 Jun 2007 18:13:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from fe-sfbay-09.sun.com ([192.18.43.129]) by sca-es-mail-1.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id l5G1DlCZ007617 for ; Fri, 15 Jun 2007 18:13:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from conversion-daemon.fe-sfbay-09.sun.com by fe-sfbay-09.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-8.04 (built Feb 28 2007)) id <0JJP00C01F9JRK00@fe-sfbay-09.sun.com> (original mail from edh@sun.com) for WSARC@sac.sfbay.sun.com; Fri, 15 Jun 2007 18:13:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [129.146.72.132] by fe-sfbay-09.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-8.04 (built Feb 28 2007)) with ESMTPSA id <0JJP00557FEZIM40@fe-sfbay-09.sun.com>; Fri, 15 Jun 2007 18:13:47 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2007 18:12:26 -0700 From: Edward Hunter Subject: Re: WSARC/2007/351 FastTrack GlassFish Service tags In-reply-to: <200706152254.l5FMsLfN019372@aha.red.iplanet.com> Sender: Ed.Hunter@sun.com To: Chris Kasso Cc: Lloyd L Chambers , WSARC@sac.sfbay.sun.com, Siraj Ghaffar , Tim Marsland , Robert Brewin Message-id: <467338FA.1080000@sun.com> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT References: <200706152254.l5FMsLfN019372@aha.red.iplanet.com> User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.0 (X11/20070424) Status: RO Content-Length: 1945 I have pinged Bob B. about whether or not the ARC waiver for ST if temporary or permanent. If it's temporary then we need to lean on them to get done. If it's permanent then there's another discussion to be had. :-) Stay tuned. -edh Chris Kasso wrote: > From: Edward Hunter > Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2007 15:19:51 -0700 > > > > The contract addresses part of the problem - the interface consumers and > producer will be cognizant of each other and thus reduces the possibility > of breakage later - it does not address the situation where the > ST project may be doing something fundamentally wrong that when shipped > exposes Sun and/or our customers to risk and, given the newly established > dependencies on ST by 60 products becomes difficult to fix without costing > Sun significant resources. > > So, if I were going to modify this fasttrack that's what I would do. > Glassfish needs either a contract or some > assurance that ST will let them know before things change. That's > actually a reasonable request since there is > no indication based on the management decision that ST will ever come > back to the ARC. Since they would > then have to complete their first case. Since the contract is meant to > force them to consider their consumers > that would probably be a good thing given the current state. > > I disagree. I guess I'm less trusting that the ST architecture is sound. > Contracts do not ensure the architecture is sound. > > Here's a case where we have a broad Sun initative to support Service Tags > yet for whatever reason we are looking for ways to hand wave around the > fact that the base functionality has not been ARC approved. What's wrong > with this picture? > > I'd much prefer the ST folks be sent back to PSARC to work out some > agreement with them. Let's get an ARC to bless this stuff before > we end up in a situation we may regret. > > Chris > From sacadmin Mon Jul 2 15:02:19 2007 Received: from sfbaymail1sca.SFBay.Sun.COM (sfbaymail1sca.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.145.154.35]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l62M2JXg017138 for ; Mon, 2 Jul 2007 15:02:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sca-es-mail-1.sun.com (sca-es-mail-1.Sun.COM [192.18.43.132]) by sfbaymail1sca.SFBay.Sun.COM (8.13.6+Sun/8.13.6/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l62M0Vox024350 for ; Mon, 2 Jul 2007 15:00:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: from fe-sfbay-09.sun.com ([192.18.43.129]) by sca-es-mail-1.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id l62M0Pw2013706 for ; Mon, 2 Jul 2007 15:00:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from conversion-daemon.fe-sfbay-09.sun.com by fe-sfbay-09.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-8.04 (built Feb 28 2007)) id <0JKK00201NP1OT00@fe-sfbay-09.sun.com> (original mail from Robert.Brewin@Sun.COM) for WSARC@sac.sfbay.sun.com; Mon, 02 Jul 2007 15:00:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [10.0.1.2] ([129.150.20.134]) by fe-sfbay-09.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-8.04 (built Feb 28 2007)) with ESMTPSA id <0JKK00IW8NSKIK30@fe-sfbay-09.sun.com>; Mon, 02 Jul 2007 15:00:20 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 02 Jul 2007 15:00:19 -0700 From: Robert Brewin Subject: Re: WSARC/2007/351 FastTrack GlassFish Service tags In-reply-to: <467338FA.1080000@sun.com> Sender: Robert.Brewin@Sun.COM To: Edward Hunter Cc: Chris Kasso , Lloyd L Chambers , WSARC@sac.sfbay.sun.com, Siraj Ghaffar , Tim Marsland , Bob Brewin Message-id: MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.752.3) Content-type: text/plain; format=flowed; delsp=yes; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT References: <200706152254.l5FMsLfN019372@aha.red.iplanet.com> <467338FA.1080000@sun.com> Status: RO Content-Length: 2209 Apologies ... didn't respond to this in anything remotely like timeliness ... what's the current status here ? - Bob On Jun 15, 2007, at 6:12 PM, Edward Hunter wrote: > I have pinged Bob B. about whether or not the ARC waiver for ST if > temporary or permanent. If > it's temporary then we need to lean on them to get done. If it's > permanent then there's another > discussion to be had. :-) Stay tuned. > -edh > > Chris Kasso wrote: >> From: Edward Hunter >> Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2007 15:19:51 -0700 >> >> >> The contract addresses part of the problem - the interface >> consumers and producer will be cognizant of each other and thus >> reduces the possibility of breakage later - it does not address >> the situation where the >> ST project may be doing something fundamentally wrong that when >> shipped >> exposes Sun and/or our customers to risk and, given the newly >> established >> dependencies on ST by 60 products becomes difficult to fix without >> costing >> Sun significant resources. >> So, if I were going to modify this fasttrack that's what I >> would do. Glassfish needs either a contract or some >> assurance that ST will let them know before things change. >> That's actually a reasonable request since there is >> no indication based on the management decision that ST will ever >> come back to the ARC. Since they would >> then have to complete their first case. Since the contract is >> meant to force them to consider their consumers >> that would probably be a good thing given the current state. >> >> I disagree. I guess I'm less trusting that the ST architecture is >> sound. >> Contracts do not ensure the architecture is sound. >> >> Here's a case where we have a broad Sun initative to support >> Service Tags >> yet for whatever reason we are looking for ways to hand wave >> around the >> fact that the base functionality has not been ARC approved. >> What's wrong >> with this picture? >> >> I'd much prefer the ST folks be sent back to PSARC to work out some >> agreement with them. Let's get an ARC to bless this stuff before >> we end up in a situation we may regret. >> >> Chris >> > From sacadmin Mon Jul 2 15:34:55 2007 Received: from sfbaymail2sca.sfbay.sun.com (sfbaymail2sca.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.145.155.42]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l62MYtmS017703 for ; Mon, 2 Jul 2007 15:34:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sca-es-mail-2.sun.com (sca-es-mail-2.Sun.COM [192.18.43.133]) by sfbaymail2sca.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.6+Sun/8.12.10/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l62MX7b0003241 for ; Mon, 2 Jul 2007 15:33:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from fe-sfbay-10.sun.com ([192.18.43.129]) by sca-es-mail-2.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id l62MX2wf005850 for ; Mon, 2 Jul 2007 15:33:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from conversion-daemon.fe-sfbay-10.sun.com by fe-sfbay-10.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-8.04 (built Feb 28 2007)) id <0JKK00L01P9VWZ00@fe-sfbay-10.sun.com> (original mail from edh@sun.com) for WSARC@sac.sfbay.sun.com; Mon, 02 Jul 2007 15:33:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [129.146.72.132] by fe-sfbay-10.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-8.04 (built Feb 28 2007)) with ESMTPSA id <0JKK009EPPB0AV60@fe-sfbay-10.sun.com>; Mon, 02 Jul 2007 15:33:00 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 02 Jul 2007 15:31:13 -0700 From: Edward Hunter Subject: Re: WSARC/2007/351 FastTrack GlassFish Service tags In-reply-to: Sender: Ed.Hunter@sun.com To: Robert Brewin Cc: Chris Kasso , Lloyd L Chambers , WSARC@sac.sfbay.sun.com, Siraj Ghaffar , Tim Marsland , Bob Brewin Message-id: <46897CB1.3070009@sun.com> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT References: <200706152254.l5FMsLfN019372@aha.red.iplanet.com> <467338FA.1080000@sun.com> User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.0 (X11/20070424) Status: RO Content-Length: 2578 We're still waiting to hear from you. We basically said we'll approve the fasttracks with the understanding that the changes should not integrate until the thing the depend on, service tags, is approved. It's then up to the respective PAC's to decide if they should wait for that approval or not. -edh Robert Brewin wrote: > Apologies ... didn't respond to this in anything remotely like > timeliness ... what's the current status here ? > > - Bob > > On Jun 15, 2007, at 6:12 PM, Edward Hunter wrote: > >> I have pinged Bob B. about whether or not the ARC waiver for ST if >> temporary or permanent. If >> it's temporary then we need to lean on them to get done. If it's >> permanent then there's another >> discussion to be had. :-) Stay tuned. >> -edh >> >> Chris Kasso wrote: >>> From: Edward Hunter >>> Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2007 15:19:51 -0700 >>> >>> >>> The contract addresses part of the problem - the interface consumers >>> and producer will be cognizant of each other and thus reduces the >>> possibility of breakage later - it does not address the situation >>> where the >>> ST project may be doing something fundamentally wrong that when shipped >>> exposes Sun and/or our customers to risk and, given the newly >>> established >>> dependencies on ST by 60 products becomes difficult to fix without >>> costing >>> Sun significant resources. >>> So, if I were going to modify this fasttrack that's what I would >>> do. Glassfish needs either a contract or some >>> assurance that ST will let them know before things change. >>> That's actually a reasonable request since there is >>> no indication based on the management decision that ST will ever >>> come back to the ARC. Since they would >>> then have to complete their first case. Since the contract is >>> meant to force them to consider their consumers >>> that would probably be a good thing given the current state. >>> >>> I disagree. I guess I'm less trusting that the ST architecture is >>> sound. >>> Contracts do not ensure the architecture is sound. >>> >>> Here's a case where we have a broad Sun initative to support Service >>> Tags >>> yet for whatever reason we are looking for ways to hand wave around the >>> fact that the base functionality has not been ARC approved. What's >>> wrong >>> with this picture? >>> >>> I'd much prefer the ST folks be sent back to PSARC to work out some >>> agreement with them. Let's get an ARC to bless this stuff before >>> we end up in a situation we may regret. >>> >>> Chris >>> >> > From sacadmin Tue Jul 3 13:29:06 2007 Received: from sfbaymail2sca.sfbay.sun.com (sfbaymail2sca.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.145.155.42]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l63KT6Uf018032 for ; Tue, 3 Jul 2007 13:29:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sca-es-mail-1.sun.com (sca-es-mail-1.Sun.COM [192.18.43.132]) by sfbaymail2sca.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.6+Sun/8.12.10/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l63KRGt1006844 for ; Tue, 3 Jul 2007 13:27:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from fe-sfbay-09.sun.com ([192.18.43.129]) by sca-es-mail-1.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id l63KRBgO000561 for ; Tue, 3 Jul 2007 13:27:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from conversion-daemon.fe-sfbay-09.sun.com by fe-sfbay-09.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-8.04 (built Feb 28 2007)) id <0JKM00K01DXF7F00@fe-sfbay-09.sun.com> (original mail from Lloyd.Chambers@Sun.COM) for WSARC@sac.sfbay.sun.com; Tue, 03 Jul 2007 13:27:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.1.8] (diglloyd.com [208.65.183.162]) by fe-sfbay-09.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-8.04 (built Feb 28 2007)) with ESMTPSA id <0JKM00ETRE5AIP30@fe-sfbay-09.sun.com>; Tue, 03 Jul 2007 13:27:11 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 03 Jul 2007 13:27:08 -0700 From: Lloyd L Chambers Subject: Re: WSARC/2007/351 FastTrack GlassFish Service tags In-reply-to: <468AAFDE.9020806@Sun.com> Sender: Lloyd.Chambers@Sun.COM To: Siraj Ghaffar , WSARC@sac.sfbay.sun.com Cc: Sherri Shieh Message-id: <0E5B4DA6-256D-4881-B4E8-4CDE4348891F@Sun.COM> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.752.3) Content-type: text/plain; format=flowed; delsp=yes; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT References: <46897CB1.3070009@sun.com> <468AAFDE.9020806@Sun.com> Status: RO Content-Length: 4039 We'll need to come to a decision on the 7/10 WSARC. SHERRI, can you add this to ARC business for that date, please? Lloyd On Jul 3, 2007, at 1:21 PM, Siraj Ghaffar wrote: > Or was that a question for Robert? > > Not sure how we can respond. We were asked to do this feature so we > did it. Either service tags case gets approved, or we (and other 60 > products) get a waiver. > > Lloyd L Chambers wrote: > >> Seems like we need Bob to respond... >> >> Begin forwarded message: >> >>> *From: *Edward Hunter > >>> *Date: *July 2, 2007 3:31:13 PM PDT >>> *To: *Robert Brewin >> > >>> *Cc: *Chris Kasso >, Lloyd L >>> Chambers >> >, WSARC@sac.sfbay.sun.com >>> , Siraj Ghaffar >>> >, Tim >>> Marsland >, >>> Bob Brewin > >>> *Subject: **Re: WSARC/2007/351 FastTrack GlassFish Service tags* >>> >>> We're still waiting to hear from you. We basically said we'll >>> approve the fasttracks with the understanding that the changes >>> should not integrate until the thing the depend on, service tags, >>> is approved. It's then up to the respective PAC's to decide if >>> they should wait for that approval or not. -edh >>> >>> Robert Brewin wrote: >>> >>>> Apologies ... didn't respond to this in anything remotely like >>>> timeliness ... what's the current status here ? >>>> >>>> - Bob >>>> >>>> On Jun 15, 2007, at 6:12 PM, Edward Hunter wrote: >>>> >>>>> I have pinged Bob B. about whether or not the ARC waiver for ST >>>>> if temporary or permanent. If >>>>> it's temporary then we need to lean on them to get done. If >>>>> it's permanent then there's another >>>>> discussion to be had. :-) Stay tuned. >>>>> -edh >>>>> >>>>> Chris Kasso wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> From: Edward Hunter > >>>>>> Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2007 15:19:51 -0700 >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> The contract addresses part of the problem - the interface >>>>>> consumers and producer will be cognizant of each other and >>>>>> thus reduces the possibility of breakage later - it does not >>>>>> address the situation where the >>>>>> ST project may be doing something fundamentally wrong that >>>>>> when shipped >>>>>> exposes Sun and/or our customers to risk and, given the newly >>>>>> established >>>>>> dependencies on ST by 60 products becomes difficult to fix >>>>>> without costing >>>>>> Sun significant resources. >>>>>> So, if I were going to modify this fasttrack that's what I >>>>>> would do. Glassfish needs either a contract or some >>>>>> assurance that ST will let them know before things change. >>>>>> That's actually a reasonable request since there is >>>>>> no indication based on the management decision that ST will >>>>>> ever come back to the ARC. Since they would >>>>>> then have to complete their first case. Since the contract >>>>>> is meant to force them to consider their consumers >>>>>> that would probably be a good thing given the current state. >>>>>> >>>>>> I disagree. I guess I'm less trusting that the ST >>>>>> architecture is sound. >>>>>> Contracts do not ensure the architecture is sound. >>>>>> >>>>>> Here's a case where we have a broad Sun initative to support >>>>>> Service Tags >>>>>> yet for whatever reason we are looking for ways to hand wave >>>>>> around the >>>>>> fact that the base functionality has not been ARC approved. >>>>>> What's wrong >>>>>> with this picture? >>>>>> >>>>>> I'd much prefer the ST folks be sent back to PSARC to work out >>>>>> some >>>>>> agreement with them. Let's get an ARC to bless this stuff before >>>>>> we end up in a situation we may regret. >>>>>> >>>>>> Chris >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >> > From sacadmin Tue Jul 3 13:54:38 2007 Received: from sfbaymail1sca.SFBay.Sun.COM (sfbaymail1sca.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.145.154.35]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l63Kscar019116 for ; Tue, 3 Jul 2007 13:54:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sca-es-mail-1.sun.com (sca-es-mail-1.Sun.COM [192.18.43.132]) by sfbaymail1sca.SFBay.Sun.COM (8.13.6+Sun/8.13.6/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l63Kqkh3000535 for ; Tue, 3 Jul 2007 13:52:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from fe-sfbay-10.sun.com ([192.18.43.129]) by sca-es-mail-1.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id l63KqfoU003019 for ; Tue, 3 Jul 2007 13:52:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from conversion-daemon.fe-sfbay-10.sun.com by fe-sfbay-10.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-8.04 (built Feb 28 2007)) id <0JKM00E01FAI3Q00@fe-sfbay-10.sun.com> (original mail from edh@sun.com) for WSARC@sac.sfbay.sun.com; Tue, 03 Jul 2007 13:52:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [129.146.72.132] by fe-sfbay-10.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-8.04 (built Feb 28 2007)) with ESMTPSA id <0JKM008A8FBTPV20@fe-sfbay-10.sun.com>; Tue, 03 Jul 2007 13:52:41 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 03 Jul 2007 13:50:52 -0700 From: Edward Hunter Subject: Re: WSARC/2007/351 FastTrack GlassFish Service tags In-reply-to: <0E5B4DA6-256D-4881-B4E8-4CDE4348891F@Sun.COM> Sender: Ed.Hunter@sun.com To: Lloyd L Chambers Cc: Siraj Ghaffar , WSARC@sac.sfbay.sun.com, Sherri Shieh Message-id: <468AB6AC.2080900@sun.com> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT References: <46897CB1.3070009@sun.com> <468AAFDE.9020806@Sun.com> <0E5B4DA6-256D-4881-B4E8-4CDE4348891F@Sun.COM> User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.0 (X11/20070424) Status: RO Content-Length: 4709 Sheri has left Sun. However, we don't need to wait for 7/10. Your fasttrack is good to go. A note should go in the mail log and to the PAC saying basically: This case depends on something that has not been approved and in theory should not integrate before that other thing is approved. If it does and there are changes required after the dependent case is approved you'll have to make those at that time. At that point the PAC can decide what to do. Either lean on the Solaris PAC to get this fixed or ignore it under the assumption that the risk is small etc. -edh Lloyd L Chambers wrote: > We'll need to come to a decision on the 7/10 WSARC. > > SHERRI, can you add this to ARC business for that date, please? > > Lloyd > > On Jul 3, 2007, at 1:21 PM, Siraj Ghaffar wrote: > >> Or was that a question for Robert? >> >> Not sure how we can respond. We were asked to do this feature so we >> did it. Either service tags case gets approved, or we (and other 60 >> products) get a waiver. >> >> Lloyd L Chambers wrote: >> >>> Seems like we need Bob to respond... >>> >>> Begin forwarded message: >>> >>>> *From: *Edward Hunter > >>>> *Date: *July 2, 2007 3:31:13 PM PDT >>>> *To: *Robert Brewin >>> > >>>> *Cc: *Chris Kasso >, Lloyd L >>>> Chambers >, >>>> WSARC@sac.sfbay.sun.com , Siraj >>>> Ghaffar >, Tim >>>> Marsland >, Bob >>>> Brewin > >>>> *Subject: **Re: WSARC/2007/351 FastTrack GlassFish Service tags* >>>> >>>> We're still waiting to hear from you. We basically said we'll >>>> approve the fasttracks with the understanding that the changes >>>> should not integrate until the thing the depend on, service tags, >>>> is approved. It's then up to the respective PAC's to decide if >>>> they should wait for that approval or not. -edh >>>> >>>> Robert Brewin wrote: >>>> >>>>> Apologies ... didn't respond to this in anything remotely like >>>>> timeliness ... what's the current status here ? >>>>> >>>>> - Bob >>>>> >>>>> On Jun 15, 2007, at 6:12 PM, Edward Hunter wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> I have pinged Bob B. about whether or not the ARC waiver for ST >>>>>> if temporary or permanent. If >>>>>> it's temporary then we need to lean on them to get done. If it's >>>>>> permanent then there's another >>>>>> discussion to be had. :-) Stay tuned. >>>>>> -edh >>>>>> >>>>>> Chris Kasso wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> From: Edward Hunter > >>>>>>> Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2007 15:19:51 -0700 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The contract addresses part of the problem - the interface >>>>>>> consumers and producer will be cognizant of each other and thus >>>>>>> reduces the possibility of breakage later - it does not address >>>>>>> the situation where the >>>>>>> ST project may be doing something fundamentally wrong that when >>>>>>> shipped >>>>>>> exposes Sun and/or our customers to risk and, given the newly >>>>>>> established >>>>>>> dependencies on ST by 60 products becomes difficult to fix >>>>>>> without costing >>>>>>> Sun significant resources. >>>>>>> So, if I were going to modify this fasttrack that's what I >>>>>>> would do. Glassfish needs either a contract or some >>>>>>> assurance that ST will let them know before things change. >>>>>>> That's actually a reasonable request since there is >>>>>>> no indication based on the management decision that ST will >>>>>>> ever come back to the ARC. Since they would >>>>>>> then have to complete their first case. Since the contract is >>>>>>> meant to force them to consider their consumers >>>>>>> that would probably be a good thing given the current state. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I disagree. I guess I'm less trusting that the ST architecture >>>>>>> is sound. >>>>>>> Contracts do not ensure the architecture is sound. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Here's a case where we have a broad Sun initative to support >>>>>>> Service Tags >>>>>>> yet for whatever reason we are looking for ways to hand wave >>>>>>> around the >>>>>>> fact that the base functionality has not been ARC approved. >>>>>>> What's wrong >>>>>>> with this picture? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I'd much prefer the ST folks be sent back to PSARC to work out some >>>>>>> agreement with them. Let's get an ARC to bless this stuff before >>>>>>> we end up in a situation we may regret. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Chris >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >> > From sacadmin Fri Jul 13 11:11:19 2007 Received: from sunmail2sca.sfbay.sun.com (sunmail2sca.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.145.155.234]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l6DIBJkG017568 for ; Fri, 13 Jul 2007 11:11:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nwk-avmta-1.SFBay.Sun.COM (nwk-avmta-1.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.146.11.74]) by sunmail2sca.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.13.7/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id l6DI9MeK012777; Fri, 13 Jul 2007 11:09:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM by nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0JL400403QFLRK00@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM>; Fri, 13 Jul 2007 11:09:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sca-es-mail-1.sun.com ([192.18.43.132]) by nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0JL400CSWQFLBOE0@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM>; Fri, 13 Jul 2007 11:09:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from fe-sfbay-10.sun.com ([192.18.43.129]) by sca-es-mail-1.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id l6DI9Lf4020941; Fri, 13 Jul 2007 11:09:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from conversion-daemon.fe-sfbay-10.sun.com by fe-sfbay-10.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-8.04 (built Feb 28 2007)) id <0JL400E01Q3YIF00@fe-sfbay-10.sun.com> (original mail from Lloyd.Chambers@Sun.COM); Fri, 13 Jul 2007 11:09:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.1.8] ([129.150.21.167]) by fe-sfbay-10.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-8.04 (built Feb 28 2007)) with ESMTPSA id <0JL4008QWQEA4530@fe-sfbay-10.sun.com>; Fri, 13 Jul 2007 11:09:15 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2007 11:08:30 -0700 From: Lloyd L Chambers Subject: advisory on FastTrack WSARC/2007/351 "GlassFish V2 Service Tag Support" Sender: Lloyd.Chambers@sun.com To: wap-pac@sun.com, WSARC Cc: Dhiru Pandey Message-id: <77CDAF6D-3E2C-4DB9-BBE1-F06822DD1BE5@Sun.COM> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.752.3) Content-type: text/plain; format=flowed; delsp=yes; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.2.0.264296 Status: RO Content-Length: 1073 This is an advisory note to WAP PAC regarding a recent WSARC case involving Service Tags support in GlassFish. ISSUE: It is very unusual to approve a case which has dependencies on other *un*approved cases. WSARC FastTrack 2007/351 has been approved: http://sac.sfbay.sun.com/arc/WSARC/2007/351/ However, WSARC/2007/351 depends on case PSARC/2006/683 "Service Tags", which has *not* met with PSARC approval: http://sac.sfbay.sun.com/arc/PSARC/2006/683/ The broad rollout of Service Tags support among Sun products swayed WSARC into approving this particular AppServer case, but not without concerns over architectural risks. ADVISORY: WAP PAC is advised that failure to obtain ARC approval of PSARC/ 2006/683 puts the AppServer at risk of unanticipated change(s) to the Service Tags APIs, command line, etc, and that there might be architectural issues in the Service Tags case that have not been addressed. However, given the broad rollout of Service Tags, all Sun products that support Service Tags share similar risks. Lloyd Chambers WSARC