[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Subject: [business-transaction] Updated Minutes for 16 January 2002
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
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Powered by eList eXpress LLC