I'm confused by your response.
Jim Marino has, in fact, presented the evidence of conforming runtime. If he hasn't yet, then the TC should be telling him what seems to be missing. The tone of your email implies that Jim's submission was somehow deficient.
Yes, as a TC, we need to accept the submission, but that's different from "if a conforming runtime is presented."
On top of that, it feels premature to put an outer bounds on how much time must be allotted, when forward progress is constrained by the convening of the other TCs, and the respective acceptance of the Fabric 3 submission by those TCs.
However, I do also agree with your desire to somehow time-limit the TC. Deadlines do help provide focus, and we all probably need to move on (and boil the next ocean). I think it more appropriate, however, to indicate a time such as N months after other TCs have accepted the Fabric 3 submissions, rather than presume that all the other TCs will manage to meet in short order, without logistical difficulties. After all, we've effectively been on a long hiatus.
Eric.
On 3/12/13 6:44 AM, Mike Edwards wrote:
Folks
Following the recent ballot on the proposal to close the SCA Assembly TC, which did not achieve the required
supermajority and so failed, we need to plan the next steps for the TC.
There has also been a flurry of activity and emails relating to conformance testing of the Fabric3 runtime which
need addressing.
The idea that the chairs would like to propose is that the SCA Assembly TC should continue working towards getting
the SCA Assembly Model specification to Committee Specification status, but only for a limited additional period
of time. We feel that reasonable notice should be given to potential conforming runtime owners to come forward,
but that we should not commit to continue the work of the TC indefinitely. So, we propose that a time limit of 3 months
is used, by which time a second conforming runtime is presented to the TC, or else we should close the TC.
If a conforming runtime is presented, then we should look to process the SCA Assembly Model specification to
Committee Specification status (note: this could extend beyond the 3 months discussed above, depending on
process issues...). Once Committee Specification status us reached, then we should consider the appropriate next
steps.
In order to discuss both the Fabric3 submissions and the content of this email, we propose to have a teleconference
of the SCA Assembly TC at the "regular" time of 08:00 Pacific on March 26th.
Note that Bindings, Java and Policy TCs will also need to meet to discuss their respective Fabric3 submissions,
so we suspect that there will be an overall process spanning a number of weeks.
Comments welcome.
Yours, Mike
Dr Mike Edwards Mail Point 137, Hursley Park STSM Winchester, Hants SO21 2JN Cloud Computing & Services Standards United Kingdom Chair UK ISO SC38 mirror committee (Cloud & SOA)
Co-Chair OASIS SCA Assembly TC
PEPPOL eProcurement team member
IBM Software Group
Phone: +44-1962 818014 (37248014)
Mobile: +44-7802-467431 (274097)
e-mail: mike_edwards@uk.ibm.com
Unless stated otherwise above:
IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number 741598.
Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU
