[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Meeting minutes 2018-11-08
ian green: ian to scribe Andrew Berezovskyi (KTH): https://github.com/oasis-tcs/oslc-core/wiki/!TC-work Andrew Berezovskyi (KTH): https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/oslc-core/201811/msg00002.html Martin Sarabura: Line termination directive... <<BR>> ian green: Jim: suggest we copy and paste minutes into TC mailing list at the end of a meeting and so avoid the need to put them in the wiki or calendar. ian green: minutes from 1 Nov 2018 10:01:25 -0500. accepted ian green: Jim: status on migration: SCM migration done (Andrew). Andrew Berezovskyi (KTH): GH id: berezovskyi ian green: Issues (Jim). Needs Jira->github issues ID mapping to complete the migration tool. IDs needed for David, Martin, Nick, Andrew. Jim Amsden: https://github.com/jamsden/testrepo ian green: Wiki (Jim/Andrew): migrate content on an as-needed basis. Is this acceptable? ian green: The old wiki will remain for historical reference (like from the new wiki). ian green: s/like/link/ ian green: Agreed to migrate only the content that is needed ian green: Only way to update will be by pull requests. Everyone who has push permissions will be able to merge into master ian green: Jim: Update on query - ready for submission for public review? ian green: David: all known work has been done by me. Jim needs to check that he's reviewed that document. ian green: David: Jim and Martin need to do a quality review. Martin: it was fine. ian green: Jim: will make a published version of the document, making it ready for csprd v1. Jim: Martin and David to look at that version, then we can vote on submissionfor public review at the next meeting. ian green: We will move this to github beforehand. Andrew Berezovskyi (KTH): https://github.com/oasis-tcs/oslc-core ian green: Jim: Need to republish core for updated cttee spec. Needs a review to check this has been done. Martin has reviewed the conformance clauses, and has made changes and believes these are done. Andrew Berezovskyi (KTH): https://raw.githack.com/ ian green: This allows the html to be rendered in the browser. Andrew Berezovskyi (KTH): https://raw.githack.com/oasis-tcs/oslc-core/master/specs/oslc-core-overview-v3.html ian green: Andrew: updates from OSLCFest which recently finished. ian green: Meeting was good, 50 attendees, 2 day event. Videos are on fb. Andrew will post link. Andrew Berezovskyi (KTH): https://www.facebook.com/oslcfest/ ian green: Users and vendors. Common perception of users is that IBM has too much control. Yet, meeting had few IBMers ian green: People complaining about dues to participate. ian green: Can we encourage "observers". But this is not permitted by OASIS. Can we admit folks freely on calls. Problem here is with IPR. ian green: We can do the drafting on github, allowing individuals to contribute. These would be required to sign CLA/legal documents etc. ian green: Some users believe there are "not enough MUSTs". ian green: How can we work this out? ian green: Jim: we'd need to pin down and document the process. ian green: Promoting the new website is one thing, but asking for contributions could be described for non-OASIS members. ian green: Andrew: what contributions might we seek? ian green: Jim: (1) statements of use. (2) participation in public reviews. (some already closed, others forthcoming). (3) join the TC ian green: Andrew: enterprises say costs too high for TC membership. ian green: David: lowest entry might be excluding smaller orgs. ian green: Andrew: there is a lower tier ("independent person" - must not be an employee) ian green: "Associate membership" - only 1 person in org, that deals with OASIS. ian green: Andrew: but these are not suitable for users. $2000 is too much. ian green: Jim: need to be written up and proposed to Chet. Allowing contributions without dues might be problematic. ian green: Andrew will run this by the STC Andrew Berezovskyi (KTH): https://www.oasis-open.org/policies-guidelines/open-projects-process ian green: Other complaints: frustration that integrations from implementations do not solve the interoperability challenges. RM is an example. ian green: Discovery and auth are examples from core ian green: Should we standardize /rootservices? ian green: David: only the parts in rootservices that are needed for core ian green: Andrew: drop-in product replacement is not seamless. ian green: MAYs/SHOULDs etc. Profiles might be a way to address this ian green: "Link Profile" - enough to create links. "Full Profile" - CRUD of resource representations. ian green: as examples ian green: Users want a honest declaration of OSLC support ian green: A profile might be like YES/NO on the conformance table ian green: HArd for users to understand the impact on integration capability at this granularity. Profile idea is coarser ian green: Jim: Lessons learned from mof/uml/sysml have proven problematic ian green: Profile sound appealing but fundamentally do not solve the problem, rather they move it elsewhere ian green: OSLC conception was that the open marketplace would distil the common currency. this hasn't happened ian green: Andrew: look at existing products, determine an _existing_ partition Andrew Berezovskyi (KTH): Showcase Platform Community Tools Governance ian green: List of members: Andrew Berezovskyi (KTH), David Honey (Persistent/IBM), ian green, Jerry Stueve, Jim Amsden, Martin Sarabura Martin Sarabura: I'll pick up the transcripts -- /Andrew
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]