[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Raw chat log for 2011-04-21 conference call.
Simon Holdsworth: Audio conference *UPDATED 10th Jan 2011* Participant Code: 7059536 USA Toll-Free 888-426-6840 begin_of_the_skype_highlighting 888-426-6840 end_of_the_skype_highlighting begin_of_the_skype_highlighting 888-426-6840 begin_of_the_skype_highlighting 888-426-6840 end_of_the_skype_highlighting end_of_the_skype_highlighting USA Caller Paid 215-861-6239 begin_of_the_skype_highlighting 215-861-6239 end_of_the_skype_highlighting UNITED KINGDOM Toll-Free 0800-368-0638 begin_of_the_skype_highlighting 0800-368-0638 end_of_the_skype_highlighting UNITED KINGDOM Caller Paid 0-20-30596451 begin_of_the_skype_highlighting 0-20-30596451 end_of_the_skype_highlighting Ireland Toll-Free 1-800-943-427 Ireland Caller Paid 0-1-5264424 begin_of_the_skype_highlighting 0-1-5264424 end_of_the_skype_highlighting Bulgaria Toll-Free 00800-117-4514 Other access codes can be found at: https://www.teleconference.att.com/servlet/glbAccess?process=1&accessCode=7059536&accessNumber=02030596451 Simon Holdsworth2: Agenda Simon Holdsworth2: 1. Opening Introductions Scribe assignment Top of the scribe list: Plamen Pavlov SAP AG David Booz IBM Martin Chapman Oracle Corporation Tom Rutt Fujitsu Limited Eric Johnson TIBCO Software Inc. Anish Karmarkar Oracle Corporation Ashok Malhotra Oracle Corporation Bryan Aupperle IBM Agenda bashing 2a. Approval of the minutes from 31 March: http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/download.php/41687/SCA%20Bindings%20minutes%202011-03-31.doc 2b. Approval of the minutes from 7 April: http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/download.php/41781/SCA%20Bindings%20minutes%202011-04-07.doc 3. Actions 20110310-03 [Editors] Make the change to the JMS spec doc + Testcases doc described in http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/sca-bindings/201103/msg00007.html 20110331-01 [Anish Karmarkar] Open issues for the two test assertion comments (BWS-TA-50009, BWS-TA-50010) 20110331-02 [Editors] Update WS-Bindings testcase spec to remove comments from test assertions 20110331-04 [Anish Karmarkar] Examine MAY and SHOULD statements in the WS Binding spec with respect to TC exit criteria 20110407-01 [Simon Holdsworth] Open issues for JMS MAY and SHOULD statements 4. New Issues http://www.osoa.org/jira/browse/BINDINGS-151 change the status of BWS-TA-20029 BWS-TA-50010 BWS-TA-50011 http://www.osoa.org/jira/browse/BINDINGS-152 BWS20027 is tested in the POJO tests http://www.osoa.org/jira/browse/BINDINGS-153 write new tests for TA-20021 TA-20022 TA-20028 TA-20032TA-20034 TA-20035 TA-40007 TA-50008 TA-50009 http://www.osoa.org/jira/browse/BINDINGS-154 Clarify optionality of MAY statements in JMS binding spec http://www.osoa.org/jira/browse/BINDINGS-155 JMS binding testcase numbering is incorrect http://www.osoa.org/jira/browse/BINDINGS-156 Clarify optionality of SHOULD statement BJM30030 http://www.osoa.org/jira/browse/BINDINGS-157 Clarify optionality of SHOULD statement BJM60009 http://www.osoa.org/jira/browse/BINDINGS-158 Clarify optionality of SHOULD statement BJM60016 http://www.osoa.org/jira/browse/BINDINGS-159 Clarify optionality of SHOULD statement BJM60001 5. Open Issues No open issues 6. AOB anonymous morphed into anish Eric Johnson: Scribe: Eric Eric Johnson: Present: 66% (6 of 9) Eric Johnson: Topic: Agenda bashing Eric Johnson: Topic: Approval of minutes Eric Johnson: Minutes of March 31: No objections, minutes are approved. Eric Johnson: Minutes of April 7: No comments, no objections, minutes are approved. Eric Johnson: Topic: Action items Eric Johnson: 20110331-02 - Simon believes it is done. Eric Johnson: 20110331-04 - Anish - we had a misunderstanding on the meaning, but it can be considered done. Eric Johnson: 20110407-01 - Complete Eric Johnson: other actions remain open. Eric Johnson: Topic: New Issues Eric Johnson: Subtopic: BINDINGS-151 Eric Johnson: Email raising issue: http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/sca-bindings/201104/msg00012.html Eric Johnson: Anish moves to open BINDINGS-151, Mike 2nds Eric Johnson: No discussion, no objections, motion passes, BINDINGS-151 opened. Eric Johnson: Subtopic: BINDINGS-152 Eric Johnson: raised in email: http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/sca-bindings/201104/msg00011.html Eric Johnson: Mike: If you have an implementation that just supports BPEL, this would be problematic. Eric Johnson: Anish: Not suggesting that we change the test suite. Suggesting that we change the table of tests to point at the POJO test suite. Eric Johnson: Bryan: May need to add a reference. Eric Johnson: Anish: ... or we could just point to the TC, but we'll need a reference of some kind. Eric Johnson: Anish moves to open BINDINGS-152, Mike 2nds. Eric Johnson: No further discussion, no objections, motion passes, BINDINGS-152 opened. Eric Johnson: Anish: previous two issues are simple - should we try to resolve? Eric Johnson: Subtopic: Resolving BINDINGS-151 anish: Mark BWS-TA-20029 as 'untestable' Mark BWS-TA-50010 as 'untested' Mark BWS-TA-50011 as 'untested' Eric Johnson: Anish: Too much trouble to bother to test the second two. Eric Johnson: Anish moves to resolve BINDINGS-151 with proposal in JIRA. Mike 2nds Eric Johnson: NO further discussion, no objections, motion passes, BINDINGS-151 resolved. Eric Johnson: Subtopic: Resolving BINDINGS-152 Eric Johnson: Anish: Question is what we point to for a reference. Don't think it is worth the trouble to do a designated cross reference. Eric Johnson: Bryan: Wording along the lines of example tests of this can be found in the tests provided by the SCA-J TC. Eric Johnson: Eric: What's the trouble of the designated cross reference? Eric Johnson: Anish: Don't want to reference another editors draft, need to reference a CS - until the other spec reaches the CS stage, yours stays in purgatory. Eric Johnson: Mike: Is this a normative cross reference? Eric Johnson: Anish: I suppose we have several options. Don't have a preference. But we should have the status reflect that it is tested by someone. Eric Johnson: Bryan: There are some normative assertions in assembly that cannot be tested by WSDL interface - and those have been deferred to language spec tests. For example, some of the overloading things. Or mixing local and remote, which you cannot do with WSDL interface. Eric Johnson: ... explicitly deferred those. Eric Johnson: Anish: Perhaps we should just resolve this next time, after looking that up. Eric Johnson: ACTION: Bryan to look up what the Assembly TC did in the cases that Bryan referred to above. Eric Johnson: Subtopic: BINDINGS-153 Tom Rutt (Fujitsu): osoa is working for me now Eric Johnson: Raised in email: http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/sca-bindings/201104/msg00013.html Eric Johnson: Mike: Don't think you can test BWS20037 - runtime can reject the request for a particularly valid reason - it doesn't support the optional feature. Eric Johnson: Anish: Aim is to make the test optional. Eric Johnson: ... isn't this true for any optional test? Eric Johnson: Mike: No. Because in this case there are two valid outcomes. Eric Johnson: Anish: For an optional test, it could generate an error, why would that be a problem. Eric Johnson: Tom: We don't have conformance classes for these items? Eric Johnson: Anish: Right now, we don't have any optional tests. We could mark these tests such that if implementation claims to support a feature, then doc for the test suite can tell how to enable the test. Eric Johnson: Tom: What is this issue telling us? Eric Johnson: Anish: No proposal. Eric Johnson: Anish: Two discussions. Do we want to have tests for optional items? And if yes, then we get to Tom's question - how do we do that? Eric Johnson: ... On first thing: Mike & anish seem to have different views. Regardless of whether or not a feature is optional, if it cannot be tested, then we should just mark it as such. Eric Johnson: ... Two implementations of normative statements might be tricky. Converting to mandatory doesn't necessarily solve this problem. Eric Johnson: ... My conclusion - we should keep the normative statements, but that we should add tests that cover them, and figure out how to tell people to run the tests. Eric Johnson: ... Whether we're going to get two implementations of a normative statement is a problem, optional or not. Eric Johnson: Mike: Do have concerns, but willing to open. Eric Johnson: Anish moves to open BINDINGS-153, 2nd by Bryan. Eric Johnson: No further discussion, no objections, motion passes, BINDINGS-153 opened. Eric Johnson: Subtopic: BINDINGS-154 Eric Johnson: No discussion. Mike moves to open BINDINGS-154, Anish 2nds. Eric Johnson: No discussion. No objections, motion passes, BINDINGS-154 opened. Eric Johnson: Subtopic: BINDINGS-155 Eric Johnson: Mike moves to open BINDINGS-155, Bryan 2nds. anish: resovle it now Eric Johnson: No further discussion. No objections. motion passes, BINDINGS-155 opened. Eric Johnson: Mike moves to resolve bindings 155 with proposal in JIRA, Anish 2nds. Eric Johnson: No discussion, no objects. Motion passes, BINDINGS-155 resolved. Eric Johnson: Subtopic: BINDINGS-156 anish: should we do a single motion to open all these similar issues? Eric Johnson: Mike: Should someone else define a wire format somewhere else could we possibly need to make this normative. Eric Johnson: Mike moves to open BINDINGS-156, Bryan 2nds. Eric Johnson: No further discussion, no objections, motion passes, BINDINGS-156 opened. Eric Johnson: Subtopic: BINDINGS-157 Eric Johnson: Mike: Think it should be a MUST Eric Johnson: Simon: Yes, but it would still be untestable. Eric Johnson: ... one possible approach - halt the request processing. Think we need more discussion to resolve. Eric Johnson: Mike: I think it is a fine issue. Eric Johnson: Mike moves to open BINDINGS-157, Bryan 2nds. Eric Johnson: No further discussion, no objections, motion passes, BINDINGS-157 opened. Eric Johnson: Subtopic: BINDINGS-158 Eric Johnson: Simon: Think this was a SHOULD simply because it was untestable. So eliminate the SHOULD and make clear that it is a MUST. Eric Johnson: Mike: Another fine issue Eric Johnson: Mike moves to open BINDINGS-158, Bryan 2nds. Eric Johnson: No further discussion, no objections, motion passes, BINDINGS-158 opened Eric Johnson: Subtopic: BINDINGS-159 Eric Johnson: Simon: This was a deliberate use of the word "SHOULD". Eric Johnson: Mike: Again, I think a fine issue Eric Johnson: Mike moves to open BINDINGS-159, Bryan 2nds Mike Edwards: woo hoo - we got thru all the new issues !!! Eric Johnson: No further discussion, no objections, motion passes, BINDINGS-159 opened Eric Johnson: Simon: We now have seven open issues. Eric Johnson: ... on vacation next week, intending to cancel next weeks call. Next call in two weeks time. Eric Johnson: Topic: AOB? Eric Johnson: Plamen for roll update. |
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]