[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Draft minutes 13th November 2013
Minutes 13th November 2013 Attendees: Software AG, Inc. Bhaskar Reddy Byreddy Voting Member Oracle Mark Carlson Voting Member 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 Secretary Oracle Gilbert Pilz Voting Member Fujitsu Limited Tom Rutt Voting Member Software AG, Inc. Prasad Yendluri Voting Member Intro: Roll Call: Voting Members: 11 of 12 (91%) meeting is quorate Topic: Agenda approval Redfining the order of the issues discussion Anish Karmarkar: discussing CNAs first would be good add new issue: https://tools.oasis-open.org/issues/browse/CAMP-150 Approved as modified. Minutes: 6th November 2013: https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/camp/email/archives/201311/msg00041.html Correction needed the minutes approved were for the 30th october 2013. Motion Gil, s: Ashok approve minutes of the 6th fixing the reference to past minutes to 30th October 2013 Passed w/o Topic: Scrum sessions notes availabale - informal so no need to approve: Session 1: https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/camp/email/archives/201311/msg00051.html Session 2: https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/camp/email/archives/201311/msg00078.html Session 3: https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/camp/email/archives/201311/msg00094.html Anish: observes the meetings were very useful Topic: Action Items None Topic: Editing Team Update Gil: Pushed out WD 29: https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/camp/document.php?document_id=51313 Jacques: New version of test assertions doc by next week New Issue: https://tools.oasis-open.org/issues/browse/CAMP-150 mechanism for creating an Assembly (or Plan) by value (i.e. POSTing the contents of a PDP or Plan file) is difficult to use Anish Karmarkar: note, we do have a high bar for new issues MartinC: 2/3 majority Gil: Need to fix this sooner than later .. proposing this to be a P1 issue Alex Heneveld: +1 we need to do this Use a multi-part data format Adrian Otto (Rackspace): +1 this is a good improvement and will aid adoption. I think forming and approving a proposal for this will not be difficult. Anish: Things will look complicated on the wire due to multi-part but ...you are not dealing with raw messages but APIs etc. May be ok Anish Karmarkar: agree with @adrian, proposal would be easy Motion: Gil moves to open 150 as P1 second Adrian No objections. 150 is open Issue Discussion: Martin: Summarized the issues into 3 groups (some errors) Anish Karmarkar: my suggestion: deal with P1 first then the CNA group We have two P1s with proposal 86 & 80 Issue: https://tools.oasis-open.org/issues/browse/CAMP-86 modified proposal in JIRA: [YAML 1.1] Oren Ben-Kiki, Clark Evans, Brian Ingerson, "YAML Ain't Markup Language (YAML) Version 1.1, 2005-10-18" http://yaml.org/spec/1.1/ . Also archived at: http://xml.coverpages.org/yaml-spec-v1.1-archive-copy.html Motion to resolve 86 with the proposal in Jira: mov: Adrian: Sec: Tom Motion Approved w/o Issue: https://tools.oasis-open.org/issues/browse/CAMP-80 Gil: Presents the issue.. Anish Karmarkar: this should be easy. We now have multiple URLs to post to. By ref is always json. By value is based on what you are posting: yaml has yaml media-type, zip has the appropriate zip media type and so on Anish Karmarkar: note that this may change based on resolution of 150 Anish Karmarkar: with the introduction of multipart Anish Karmarkar: in which case would just talk about the root part in the multipart Anish Karmarkar: the nice thing about multipart is that by-ref and by-value are equivalent as both can now have parameters .. and proposed resolution Anish: likes the proposal but issue 150 might change it .. Alex: Likes the proposal MOTION: Gil: Moves to resolve issue 150 the proposal in Jira S: Tom Approved w/o Issues with proposals to close with no action: Issue: https://tools.oasis-open.org/issues/browse/CAMP-147 Issue: https://tools.oasis-open.org/issues/browse/CAMP-143 Issue: https://tools.oasis-open.org/issues/browse/CAMP-114 Issue: https://tools.oasis-open.org/issues/browse/CAMP-88 Issue: https://tools.oasis-open.org/issues/browse/CAMP-84 Issue: https://tools.oasis-open.org/issues/browse/CAMP-79 Issue: https://tools.oasis-open.org/issues/browse/CAMP-42 Issue: https://tools.oasis-open.org/issues/browse/CAMP-11 All above are P2s P3: https://tools.oasis-open.org/issues/browse/CAMP-69 Issue: https://tools.oasis-open.org/issues/browse/CAMP-59 Issue: https://tools.oasis-open.org/issues/browse/CAMP-27 Ashok: Scaling Policy, Alex talked about sending us an example. Alex: I am happy to send the example, we can keep the issue open but I don't think it belongs in the spec Ashok: I am happy to close the issue but like see the example AI Motion: Ashok moves to close all the issues listed above with no action, second: Anish issus: 147, 148, 114, 88, 84, 79, 42, 11, 69, 59, 27 Motion approved w/o objections Issue: https://tools.oasis-open.org/issues/browse/CAMP-62 Gil: Explains the issue and proposal MartinC: note this was an action from the scrum so the proposal was not agreed in the scrum per see Anish: we are stuck with JSON types and ... The order is relevant ...if the client or provider does not maintain that order unexpected things can happen wrt issue resolution, should we just stay silent? Tom: Sympatise with Gil. But.. What is the scope of this across multiple HTTP requests? Anish: You are asking reg. reboots and patch etc. We already say you should do conditional updates .... You do a get prior to update but, if things change (e.g. reboot after get) if not .... sure resources are in the same order, you should do a conditional update, i.e. update only if things are the same as befopre. Adrian: I am not clear on the problem.. Anish Karmarkar: i'm more inclined to CNA this Anish Karmarkar: don't mess with the order Gil: the issue stems from my impl. experience Anish Karmarkar: if you mess with the order bad things will happen Adrain: Are you providing advise but not placing restrictions in the spec? GiL: I am asking for restrictions Adrin: why use soft lang. like advise.. Anish: We have already said order is relevant (saying something restrictive already) .. we already have a strong language Alex: This has never been an issue before but it might become .. It is technically not necessary but, this should go in the primer not the spec we should state the problem more precisely.. discussing tweaking proposal text Gil: contemplates aloud the wisdom of putting in the spec or in a primer Anish Karmarkar: if we wanted to say something stronger (as suggested by Adrian) we could ...say: "Providers SHALL preserve the order of the elements in JSON arrays across HTTP requests when there is no change to the array" Tom: the last sentence (the advise) should not be part of the spec, it is the confusing part Anish Karmarkar: or something like that Gil: suggests to close with no action and take it up in the primer MOTION: Gil: Moves to close issue 62 with no action. Second: Adrian Approved w/o objections. Isues 62 is close with no action Issue: CAMP 74 https://tools.oasis-open.org/issues/browse/CAMP-74 Gil: Elaborates the issue Tom: section 2.3 needs to be updated Tom Rutt (Fujitsu): need to update 2.3 Anish Karmarkar: i like this proposal Anish Karmarkar: this is a very clever way Anish Karmarkar: it reduces the number of ways to do the same thing Anish Karmarkar: to one Tom Rutt (Fujitsu): change sentence under fig 2-6 On platforms that choose to support Plans, ... a CAMP Consumer can create a Plan resource by uploading either a PDP or a Plan file to the .... Plans resource URI using an HTTP POST request. Tom Rutt (Fujitsu): to Tom Rutt (Fujitsu): On platforms that choose to support Plans, a CAMP Consumer can create .... a Plan resource by uploading either a PDP or a Plan file to the Assemblies resource URI using an HTTP POST request. Gil: Still need to update the proposal MOTION: Gil: motions to approve Jira proposal with Toms' suggested modification above, Second: Tom Approved w/o objections. Issue 74 is resolved. TOPIC: AOB Straggler: none Meeting Adjourned
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]