[ebxml-iic-msg] Re: ebXML IIC 6/3/2002: [ebxml-iic] CTTF and TestDocuments

[Matthew MacKenzie <matt@xmlglobal.com>]

Monica,

See inline...

Regards,

Matt

On Monday, June 3, 2002, at 10:16  AM, Monica Martin wrote:
>
> 	<monica> If there is a portion of the test suite that revs with
> changes, does that mean the entire test suite revs?  The more you
> modularize the architecture the greater the chance that you may need to
> use min/max versioning.  Just a thought otherwise republish of entire
> suite is required. </monica>
>

I'm not comfortable having versioning at the test case level.  My 
inclination is to rev the entire suite.  This meshes well with our 
internal work scheduling pattern.  We can at least plan a full rev 
release.

> 	<monica>Suggest some discussion of automation over time, and the
> realization that the suite and specification may not always change in
> unison.</monica>
>

This is an issue, but luckily the messaging spec doesn't change all that 
often.  My suggestion is to have major revs match major spec revs, and 
minor revs match spec minor revs, then have the last number our internal 
rev.  So ebXML Messaging 2.1 would have test suites versioned between 
2.1.0 and 2.1.infinity.

> 	<monica>I have seen a discussion about profiles that will be
> used for two different functions: (1) Profiles or levels of conformance
> bounding the conformance strength (weak or strong, and to what levels
> within the appropriate specifications), and (2) Profiles or
> configurations that will be actually used in the get/setCPPA functions
> to enable the tests (regardless of if they are manually implemented in a
> text file at this time).  Keying on controls of availability, access and
> use of the profiles to support the testing.</monica>

Ok, we should discuss this one further.  I think we have instituted some 
of this, but I think it has to be more overt.

--
Matthew MacKenzie
XML Global R&D
PGP Key available upon request.