OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.

 


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

odata message

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]


Subject: RE: Suggestion for grouping motion on ODATA-8(1,2,3)


Hi Stefan,

I second #1.

Regarding #2: Two issues have already been applied, I added a link to the document version to the Jira tickets:
 - https://tools.oasis-open.org/issues/browse/ODATA-92: applied in the JSON 2012-09-07 version,
 - https://tools.oasis-open.org/issues/browse/ODATA-94: applied in the CSDL 2012-09-03 version.
Both issues are minor, so they qualified for the fast track. I moved them to Applied, which I should have done after uploading the corresponding document versions. 

Thanks for reminding me!
--Ralf


-----Original Message-----
From: Stefan Drees [mailto:stefan@drees.name] 
Sent: Wednesday, 12. September 2012 10:59
To: Handl, Ralf
Cc: odata@lists.oasis-open.org; Stefan Drees
Subject: Suggestion for grouping motion on ODATA-8(1,2,3)

* PGP Signature not checked

Dear Ralf,

in the upcoming meeting I would like to
1.
move that the ODATA-Issues with numbers 81, 82 and 83 are approved as 
proposed.
Would you second this :?)
May I even go further and ask, if there are other issues with "small 
and/or merely editorial impact, and proposed resolutions which are ready 
to implement" that we might add to the above list ?

2.
Are there (in addition to ODATA-85) issues that might just "jump right 
into "accepted as open, proposed and closed as applied"-state?

@all:
Any comments or suggestions upon other grouped acceptance perspectives? 
With regard to the impact of single issue processing on 
processing/meeting time (approx. independant of the issue's 
granularity!) there might be some candidates for "bunching", at least 
when I read the list of the 36 Issues queued in "New and Proposed State" 
... IMO a discussion grouping might also be a performance boost, since 
"our attention" is better supported, then with permanent context-switch 
from issue to issue. So if there is a better sequence in processing than 
the number ordering ... please suggest it.

All the best,
Stefan.


* Signature checking is off by policy


[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]