[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [emix] Documents and SGIP
So what is the answer to the original
question? Would the Public Review period for EMIX impact the timeline for
Energy Interop in regards to being able to make the necessary schema changes in
EMIX to support EI? Bruce
Bartell Xtensible Solutions From: Toby Considine
[mailto:tobyconsidine@gmail.com] On Behalf Of
Toby Considine Excellent question. Here is my
non-normative interpretation of our (EMIX) process. It is a principle in OASIS that we not
change specifications while they are out for PR. Doing so, in effect,
says to the reviewers “we don’t care what you think, we have already
moved on.” This tends to limit the participation in reviews. After the
first PR, the review need be no longer than two weeks. It is best practice, however, to record
issues as they come in, rather than waiting until later. Once issues are
recorded, we can, of course, discuss them, and propose solutions. This is much
cleaner when Jira is set up, and we can formally work the process. When all the comments are in, and the PR
is over, we must of course evaluate all the perspectives and comments, and weigh
the competing interests. For EnergyInterop, especially the
non-EMIX participants, this is an opportunity to note concerns and issues. It
is of course also an opportunity for wider interests as well. For the
participant in both TCs, it is easy to log those issues directly, and begin
working the issues. In a similar way, I hope that EMIX (and
EnergyInterop) folks take the opportunity to comment on issues in WS-Calendar.
A delicate dance goes on there, with the specification being simultaneously
worked within the IETF and OASIS processes. If we look back to our current process,
in Jira, it fits nicely with this. We have developed our own way of using the
workflows. 1) An Issue is logged. 2) An issue is opened when someone
starts to work it. Proposed resolutions and comments can bounce back and forth.
3) When a proposal is ready to change
the spec, and logged in Jira as a resolution, we mark it resolved. 4) If necessary, the TC reviews
Resolved issues, and can either approve the resolution (Apply Resolution) or
reject the resolution. 5) The editor actually inserts the
“Resolution Applied” issues into the spec, and checks it off the
list by closing the Issue. There is no reason why we can’t
have many issues with the resolution stated (3) and ready for step 4, for
review and approval, and quick application to the specification and artifacts.
The TC would come to any decision-making process with the full scope of
comments before it. This honors transparency, and respects
the review, while enabling us to continue working. There are a number of examples indicated
in the current emix Jira, and those examples require prose. I would recommend
that each assignee develop it as a document, contribute that documnent, and
then propose in Jira that “The issue be reolved by incorporating document
at link ----- as Appendix S. This will leave us with all existing issues also
ready to close in short order. With any luck, and some diligence, a week after
the review we could have the specification ready for another PR. tc "If something is not worth doing,
it`s not worth doing well" - Peter Drucker
From: Bartell, Bruce
[mailto:bbartell@xtensible.net] There will be (are) JIRA issues submitted
in EI that will impact the EMIX schemas. Does a PR for EMIX during that time
preclude making any schema changes as requested by EI? Bruce
Bartell Xtensible Solutions From: Toby Considine
[mailto:tobyconsidine@gmail.com] On Behalf Of
Toby Considine It
has been suggested that we put together a package of EMIX work to share with
the Nashville SGIP meeting. If you read the recent interpretation of the rules
(Monday night) then you know that it cannot include any changes or directions
received in tomorrow’s meeting. You
have all seen that EMIX (spec, schemas, and examples) was updated on Tuesday
afternoon. If we want to share that work with the SGIP, then we should request
a 2 week PR at the meeting. Please
be on the meeting (we need an absolute majority to vote a PR), and familiar
with the latest documents and artifacts. In particular, I propose that a Public
Review be based on http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/download.php/41575/emix-1-0-spec-wd20.pdf and http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/download.php/41576/emix-1-0-schemas-wd20.zip The
note the other night stated that we must vote these documents, precisely, with
no changes allowed of any kind. We
must, unfortunately, continue to carry the WS-Calendar schemas forward in this
package as it is unclear if that TC will be able to pull off a second PR vote
as they are not scheduled to meet this week. If
we are able to vote itout for PR, I will then propose that we distribute links
and information to all PAP04, PAP04, and PAP09 (and the relevant DEWGS) before
the weekend before the SGIP meeting. Thanks tc “It
is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends upon
his not understanding it” -- Upton Sinclair.
|
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]