[business-transaction] Updated Minutes for 16 January 2002

[William Cox <William.Cox@bea.com>]

BTP Meeting Minutes 16 January 2002 (updated version)
(Raw notes from Bill Bathurst, Bill Cox)

Agenda:

  Issues Votes
  Timeframe/Schedule Discussions
  Primer Outline

Attendees:
Members:
   Bill Cox
   Alex Ceponkus
   Peter Furniss
   Victor Corrales
   Tony Fletcher
   Sanjay Dalal
   Pyounguk Cho
   Mark Little
   Steve White
   Alex Berson
   Gordon Hamilton
   Sazi Temel
   Jim Webber
   Steve Viens
   Doug Bunting
(Bill Pope could not attend; Bill Cox chaired the meeting.)

Observer:
   Bill Bathurst, Oracle.

Selected Document Issues and proposed resolutions were discussed, and
all but one accepted by unanimous consent:

  #7  Accepted
  #57 Accepted
  #62 Accepted
  #79 Accepted
  #80 Accepted
  #82 Deferred. Anyone who was involved in this discussion *should*
      use the BTP mailing list to further articulate their ideas,
suggestions,etc.
  #83 Accepted
  #84 Accepted
  #85 Accepted
  #86 Accepted

Timeframes/Schedule:

There was a spirited discussion on realistic timeframes for finishing a
committee draft. This agenda item was present to get us to start
examining a realistic schedule for the endgame of BTP 1.0.  No formal
votes were take, so notes below indicate the sense of the meeting.
Straw man proposal for discussion:

* Model and Primer required for D 0.95 and later
* Complete Draft 0.95 end of February (and stop modifying the draft for
review)
* Face-to-face, probably at Oracle, in March (dates TBD, 3-4 weeks after

stable D 0.95)
* Complete updated Draft 0.99 reflecting committee review mid-April,
suitable for broader review
* 4 week review period ending mid-May
* Committee Draft with issues resolved or listed as open, end of May

Summary of discussion: D 0.95 target date of Feb 13th - Feb 27th is
achievable, with more participation of members (consensus).

Brief sermon from Bill Cox on participation if we're going to make the
timetable under discussion -- issues processing is critical, and there's

not much discussion.

In informal discussion, the group agreed that model and primer are
needed for completion, and that a detailed review/walkthrough F2F was
needed of the next stable draft.  Several members suggested that both
the model and primer are necessary for the next review: it's hard to get

people to review our document when they have to dedicate several days to

the task.

Peter suggested that D 0.99 could be completed within 4 weeks after D
0.95, and that D 1.0 could then be completed within an additional 1-2
weeks.  Discussion on having two 4-week review periods or one.  No
consensus reached. Four weeks from draft to draft does not allow a four
week review period.  Further discussion needed.

We discussed requirements for moving the committee draft to OASIS. Three

implementations, complete and consistent document are required; no one
knew the precise requirements. Someone noted that this group should
avoid the same mistakes made in developing the JMS specification (moving

too quickly to get a consistent set of semantics)

Need more member involvement in this process.

Primer Outline:

Brief discussion; people seemed to think it was a good start.  Comments
via email requested.

Action Items

All: Work on resolving issues so we can get to a complete reviewable
draft.

  Next meeting is Jan 30th.

begin:vcard 
n:Cox;William
tel;cell:+1 908 385 7855
tel;fax:+1 908 580 3060
tel;work:+1 908 580 3458
x-mozilla-html:FALSE
url:http://www.bea.com/
org:BEA Systems, Inc.;Architecture and Standards
adr:;;140 Allen Rd;Liberty Corner;NJ;07938;USA
version:2.1
email;internet:William.Cox@bea.com
title:Technical Director
fn:William Cox
end:vcard