[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Raw chat log of 2011-02-17 call
Simon Holdsworth: Participant Code: 7059536
USA Toll-Free 888-426-6840 begin_of_the_skype_highlighting
888-426-6840 end_of_the_skype_highlighting
USA Caller Paid 215-861-6239
UNITED KINGDOM Toll-Free 0800-368-0638
UNITED KINGDOM Caller Paid 0-20-30596451
Ireland Toll-Free 1-800-943-427
Ireland Caller Paid 0-1-5264424
Bulgaria Toll-Free 00800-117-4514
Simon Holdsworth: 1. Opening
Introductions
Scribe assignment
Top of the scribe list:
Plamen Pavlov SAP AG
Laurent Domenech TIBCO Software Inc.
Anish Karmarkar Oracle Corporation
Ant Elder IBM
Bryan Aupperle IBM
David Booz IBM
Martin Chapman Oracle Corporation
Tom Rutt Fujitsu Limited
Eric Johnson TIBCO Software Inc.
Ashok Malhotra Oracle Corporation
Agenda bashing
2. Approval of the minutes from 3 February:
http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/download.php/41024/SCA%20Bindings%20minutes%202011-02-03.doc
3. Actions
20110127-1 [Anish Karmarkar] Resolve the question on whether these
needed changes to the front matter [of the JMS and WS test case
documents to reference the test case artefacts] will require a new draft.
20110203-1 [Eric Johnson] Ask how long the IETF standardization process
is likely to take for the JMS URI spec?
20110203-2 [Simon Holdsworth] Check on reference update for new revision
of IETF JMS URI spec, possible designated cross reference with TC Admin
4. New Issues
No new issues
5. CD/PR status
JMS Binding spec 15-day PR in progress, complete on 10th February.
6. AOB
anish: Scribe: Anish Karmarkar
anish: Topic: Agenda bashing
anish: Agenda approved
anish: Topic: approval of 2011-02-03 minutes
anish:
http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/download.php/41024/SCA%20Bindings%20minutes%202011-02-03.doc
anish: Minutes approved
anish: Topic: AI review
anish: 20110127-1 [Anish Karmarkar] Resolve the question on whether
these needed changes to the front matter [of the JMS and WS test case
documents to reference the test case artefacts] will require a new draft.
20110203-1 [Eric Johnson] Ask how long the IETF standardization process
is likely to take for the JMS URI spec?
20110203-2 [Simon Holdsworth] Check on reference update for new revision
of IETF JMS URI spec, possible designated cross reference with TC Admin
anish: 20110127-1 done
anish: The TC admin's response was that we have to republish a new rev
if we want to do that update
anish: The TC needs to decide what it would like to do
anish: The process rules do not allow such an update
anish: The J TC has decided to do a new rev if the TC admin can do a
quick turnaround on PR
anish: There is another issue regard this in the J TC, which may require
a new rev. The same may apply to the bindings TC
anish: The issue is that the TC/TAs don't have a conformance section.
And to be a CS, we need a conformance section. The J TC recieved a
comment along those lines from a TAB member
anish: Mike: for the TC doc the conformance clause can be simple -- if
you want to conform pass the tests
anish: ... For the TA doc, this is a little trickier
anish: Simon: updating the conformance section would require a re-review
anish: Mike: yes, the TC is going to need a re-review anyway
anish: s/TC/TC doc/
anish: Simon: sounds like this is applicable to all specs and we should
come up with wordings that we agree on and that can go in all specs
anish: Anish: one thought is that amongst the three-legged stool of
spec, TA and TC docs. The most important ones are the spec and the TC.
So, if necessary, I don't think it would be a big loss to have the TA be
a Committee Note
anish: Bryan: what changes /IPR implication does this have?
anish: Eric: does the TAB TA guideline offer anything wrt to this?
anish: Mike: don't know
anish: Simon: does this need to be decided at a higher level?
anish: Anish: the TC is empowered to decide, but may want to coordinate
it across SCA TCs. Perhaps the liaison committee
anish: Mike: would like to do as little as possible. Nothing wrong with
the specs.
anish: ... since we have to do the TC doc re-review anyway, so doing the
TA doc at the some times doesn't delay anything
anish: Simon: there is a conformance section in the JMS TA doc, which
says that there is no conformance requirement
anish: Anish: this is true of all SCA TA specs. The process rules
require that it state what it takes to conform
anish: Simon: we need someone to take an AI for this
anish: ACTION: Anish to send a proposal wrt TA/TC conformance section
anish: Mike: would need an issue for this
anish: ACTION: Mike to raise an issue regarding conformance sections and
references
Mike Edwards: Assembly TestCases doc has this:
Mike Edwards: Related Work:
The Test Suite artifacts relating to this document can be found here:
http://docs.oasis-open.org/opencsa/sca-assembly/sca-assembly-1.1-testcases-cd03.zip
anish: Eric: if we are going to revving the spec, haven't received a
response from IETF
anish: ... + there are updated links for JMS spec from Anish
anish: Simon: since we are revving the spec would want to do this
anish: AI 20110203-1 pending
anish: ACTION: Eric to raise an issue to update the JMS spec reference
anish: AI 20110203-2 pending. Simon has not received a response
regarding that.
anish: Topic: AOB
anish: Simon on vacation next thursday. Anyone volunteers to chair or
should we cancel?
anish: Mike volunteers to chair next week.
anish: Mike will be the pro-tem chair next week
anish: Meeting adjourned
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]