oslc-core message
[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]
| [List Home]
Subject: Cannot attend meetings this week
- From: "Nicholas Crossley" <nick_crossley@us.ibm.com>
- To: "OASIS OSLC Core TC Discussion List (oslc-core@lists.oasis-open.org)" <oslc-core@lists.oasis-open.org>
- Date: Thu, 10 May 2018 00:47:56 -0700
Unfortunately, a conflict has arisen so
I cannot attend either the Core or Domain TC meetings this week.
I was due to have two bits of work ready
for review by this Thursday, but neither have been completed.
1. TRS spec update
In three separate discussions over the
last week, I have been asked questions or posed scenarios that have made
me realize that we are missing some significant information about how to
use TRS - how the base and change log interact, how rebasing can work,
and how clients should behave. The edits that I was making to the TRS spec
now seem inadequate. I have gone back to the drawing board somewhat,
and I'm writing a detailed scenario document, describing a complete timeline
for a server generating base pages, adding change events, rebasing and
truncating the change log with at least two different techniques, while
at the same time two different clients are reading the TRS feed. The note
points out some of the possible order of events on this timeline, and how
the clients and server interact to ensure correct behavior.
This document is intended to serve as
a basis for discussion, to ensure we all have a common understanding of
how TRS is supposed to work. From that, we can decide what needs to be
added to the normative spec, and what should be published as a committee
note.
I am not yet ready to have this new
document reviewed - I expect to have it done by the end of next week, probably
too late for the Core TC meeting on Thursday, and anyway, TC members will
need time to read and comment. So, I expect some discussion in a meeting
on Thursday 24th - Martin, could we schedule a subcommittee meeting for
that after the Domains TC timeslot?
2. Configuration Management spec
I have found a few areas where previously
discussed updates have not yet been applied to the draft, such as the change
set lifecycle LDPCs, etc. That plus the time diverted to the new TRS scenario
doc means the config mgmt spec is also not yet ready for review. I'd like
to put that temporarily on hold until we get the TRS scenario doc done,
so we can focus on getting the underlying Core pieces complete.
Nick.
[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]
| [List Home]