OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.

 


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

oslc-domains message

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]


Subject: RE: [oslc-core] Cannot attend meetings this week


I am also in an all day workshop so will be unable to attend today.

 

Mark

 

From: oslc-domains@lists.oasis-open.org [mailto:oslc-domains@lists.oasis-open.org] On Behalf Of Jad El-Khoury
Sent: Thursday, May 10, 2018 3:39 AM
To: OASIS OSLC Core TC Discussion List (oslc-core@lists.oasis-open.org) <oslc-core@lists.oasis-open.org>; OASIS OSLC Domains TC <oslc-domains@lists.oasis-open.org>
Subject: [oslc-domains] Re: [oslc-core] Cannot attend meetings this week

 

It is public holiday in Sweden today, so I will also not be able to attend

Jad 


On 10 May 2018, at 09:48, Nicholas Crossley <nick_crossley@us.ibm.com> wrote:

Unfortunately, a conflict has arisen so I cannot attend either the Core or Domain TC meetings this week.

I was due to have two bits of work ready for review by this Thursday, but neither have been completed.

1. TRS spec update

In three separate discussions over the last week, I have been asked questions or posed scenarios that have made me realize that we are missing some significant information about how to use TRS - how the base and change log interact, how rebasing can work, and how clients should behave. The edits that I was making to the TRS spec now seem inadequate.  I have gone back to the drawing board somewhat, and I'm writing a detailed scenario document, describing a complete timeline for a server generating base pages, adding change events, rebasing and truncating the change log with at least two different techniques, while at the same time two different clients are reading the TRS feed. The note points out some of the possible order of events on this timeline, and how the clients and server interact to ensure correct behavior.

This document is intended to serve as a basis for discussion, to ensure we all have a common understanding of how TRS is supposed to work. From that, we can decide what needs to be added to the normative spec, and what should be published as a committee note.

I am not yet ready to have this new document reviewed - I expect to have it done by the end of next week, probably too late for the Core TC meeting on Thursday, and anyway, TC members will need time to read and comment. So, I expect some discussion in a meeting on Thursday 24th - Martin, could we schedule a subcommittee meeting for that after the Domains TC timeslot?

2. Configuration Management spec

I have found a few areas where previously discussed updates have not yet been applied to the draft, such as the change set lifecycle LDPCs, etc. That plus the time diverted to the new TRS scenario doc means the config mgmt spec is also not yet ready for review. I'd like to put that temporarily on hold until we get the TRS scenario doc done, so we can focus on getting the underlying Core pieces complete.

Nick.



[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]