[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Draft Minutes 11th June 2014
Meetign Minutes 11th June 2014 Attendees: Oracle Martin Chapman Chair Fujitsu Limited Jacques Durand Voting Member Cloudsoft Corporation Limited Alex Heneveld Voting Member Oracle Anish Karmarkar Voting Member Oracle Ashok Malhotra Voting Member Rackspace Hosting, Inc. Adrian Otto Chair Oracle Gilbert Pilz Voting Member Fujitsu Limited Tom Rutt Voting Member Software AG, Inc. Prasad Yendluri Voting Member Intro: Sribe: Ashok Roll: Attendees listed above. Voting Members: 9 of 10 (90%), meeting is quorate. Agenda: approved as posted Minutes: 4th June 2014: https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/camp/email/archives/201406/msg00003.html Motion: Gil moves to accept. Anish seconds. Minutes approved without objection No action items: Admin: 3 open issues No new issues. No editing team update as no issues were resolved. Topic: ISSUE-169 https://tools.oasis-open.org/issues/browse/CAMP-169 Gil: We discussed and agreed to remove example that causes confusion Gil goes thru the changes on WebEx Martin: Just changed informative text. So, no material change. Tom: Where is the text that enables this. Gil: 4.3.5.2 hidden in fact that it is either string or service specification Motion: Gil: Moves to accepct his proposal in JIRA as resolution for ISSUE-169. Alex seconds Resolved without objection Topic: ISSUE-171 https://tools.oasis-open.org/issues/browse/CAMP-171 Gil explains proposal PR-76 is a new requirement Gil: Text to explain that SELECT ATTR applies to PUT as well as GET Discussion about what happens when an attribute that is selected by SELECT ATTR but is omitted in the body Tom: Behaviour needs clarification Jacques (Fujitsu): If a resource attribute is present on a resource and if an HTTP PUT request that does not have select-attr parameter omits that attribute in its body, it SHOULD be treated by the Provider as a request to delete the attribute. [PR-25] Gil makes a textual proposal Tom likes the proposal Martin: Gil will take another stab at a proposal Topic: ISSUE-172 https://tools.oasis-open.org/issues/browse/CAMP-172 Alex Heneveld: "CAMP does not endorse any particular versioning scheme. Users of CAMP are encouraged just to do things right the first time." Alex: This will take care of itself. People will use simple versioning strategies. Tom: Scary to be adding functionality at this stage Martin: Would people be happy to defer this issue? Adrian: The rationale was to be able to move an app from one implementation of CAMP to another. ... if we defer we are giving up on that Anish: We can put a specific versioning scheme in the primer and see what uptake we get Alex: I don't think it is a big interop issue ... because the interpretation of the version is up to the provider of the service Martin: I don't think primer is appropriate place for this ... if we providing a syntax it should go in the spec Alex Heneveld: rational version scheme ... i like that, as opposed to having to use v1.41421... :) Gil: "versions SHALL be expressed as rational numbers" Martin: We need to keep discussing this AOB: Stragglers: Adrian added Martin: Can we cancel next weeks call? Next week's call is cancelled. Next meeting on 25th June 2014 ADJOURNED
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]