RE: [cmis] Versions of the Specification and Planning... (v0.52 vs. v0.6)

[Choy_David@emc.com]

Yes, as David Nuescheler pointed out, there is confusion on version
number.
Given our intended scope for release 1 and our aggressive straw-man
schedule, the new version (with new verbiage and many bug-fixes) is
getting close. Let us designate it v0.6. The next "major" version
(v0.7?) will likely be the incorporation of any pending proposal
accepted by the TC.

David Caruana made a good point that a version should include all its
parts. I like his idea of "previewing" individual parts, and designating
them as such.

David

-----Original Message-----
From: David Caruana [mailto:david.caruana@alfresco.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, March 10, 2009 11:08 AM
To: David Nuescheler
Cc: cmis@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: Re: [cmis] Versions of the Specification and Planning... (v0.52
vs. v0.6)

I agree with David's sentiments, both on the great work on the spec,  
but also around misunderstanding the plan.

Perhaps with a few tweaks we can clarify how new spec versions are  
released. I'd like to present the following ideas.

There's already the straw-man schedule with planned spec updates. This  
seems a great place to also indicate the intended version number of  
spec update.

The planned spec updates are followed by review time, so I think all  
parts of the spec must be updated and released simultaneously for  
planned updates.

There may be occasions where it's useful to provide previews of  
planned updates. In this case, the spec version is marked  
appropriately e.g. v0.6 preview 1. Perhaps it's ok to release  
individual parts of the spec for preview purposes.

Issue resolution planning could be tracked in JIRA. I believe there's  
a 'Fix Version' field to target a resolution at a particular version  
of the spec.

Regards,
Dave


On 10 Mar 2009, at 11:26, David Nuescheler wrote:

> Hi All,
>
> thanks for everybody's great work on the specification.
> I think it is really encouraging to see the issues come in
> at a steady pace...
>
> I think I may have misunderstood the current plan and
> wanted to check if I missed something. I thought the plan
> was to release a 0.52 at end of this month?
> So I was a little surprised to see 0.6 being checked in...
>
> Since we (the TC members) need to assign resources to
> read through the specification (implementing or reading) I think
> it would be very helpful for our planning to have a bit
> of an "update plan" on when next version of the specification
> will be released and what issues are being worked on.
>
> I appreciate that the synchronization between
> Al and Ethan probably works fine in terms of who works on
> what when, so it would be great if you could share your plan of
> action with rest of the TC. I think this would be as simple
> as sharing what issues you are currently working on.
>
> (Of course it would be great if the resolutions [newly committed
> verbiage to the specification] would be shared in the respective
> issue, as soon as it is in the private draft version of the spec,
> since this would enable much faster turn around times, in
> re-opening issues...)
>
> Maybe other members of the TC can comment on this as well.
>
> Maybe I am completely off here, and I just missed the information
> on that subject, in which case I would like to apologize...
>
> regards,
> david
>
> -- 
> Visit: http://dev.day.com/
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that
> generates this mail.  Follow this link to all your TCs in OASIS at:
> https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php
>


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that
generates this mail.  Follow this link to all your TCs in OASIS at:
https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php