[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [sca-bpel] Getting ready for PRD
Don't we have a current standing rule for a 2/3 majority to re-open an issue? > -----Original Message----- > From: Anish Karmarkar [mailto:Anish.Karmarkar@oracle.com] > Sent: 03 March 2009 06:17 > To: 'OASIS BPEL' > Subject: Re: [sca-bpel] Getting ready for PRD > > I would agree that we should have a higher bar for reopening an old > issue, but not for opening a new issue. The problem I see in > implementing this is that it requires the TC to decide whether an issue > is the same as the one that is already closed. This isn't always > black/white. This means majority can "reopen" an old issue by filing a > new issue and claim that it is different (ever so slightly from the old > one). > > For simplicity, it seems to me that we should just scrap the 2/3rd rule > once we go PR. I would hope that the majority would need lot of > additional new convincing information to reopen an issue. > > Comments? > > -Anish > -- > > Martin Chapman wrote: > > Anish, > > > > I'd be happy with not requiring 2/3 to open an issue, but I think we should still keep the 2/3 for > re-opening a closed or deferred > > issue, which will include pre-PR comments. > > > > Martin. > > > > > > > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: Anish Karmarkar [mailto:Anish.Karmarkar@oracle.com] > >> Sent: 02 March 2009 19:57 > >> To: Danny van der Rijn > >> Cc: OASIS BPEL > >> Subject: Re: [sca-bpel] Getting ready for PRD > >> > >> Danny van der Rijn wrote: > >>> > >>> Anish Karmarkar wrote: > >>>> Few things we need to agree on for PRD: > >>>> > >>>> 2) Duration of the public review: OASIS process requires the 1st PR to > >>>> be minimum of 60 days. I would like to suggest that we stick with the > >>>> minimum. > >>>> > >>> +1. (60, not 61 ^_^) > >>>> > >>>> 4) How to deal with issues raised during the PR period either by TC > >>>> members or non-TC members? > >>>> Per the process, the TC must acknowledge the receipt of each comment, > >>>> track the comments received, and publish to its primary e-mail list the > >>>> disposition of each comment at the end of the review period. > >>>> > >>>> I would like to suggest that we follow SCA Policy TC's lead. Which is to > >>>> create a new component/subcomponent in JIRA for PR comments. All new > >>>> issues raised, after we agree on the PRD, either by non-members or > >>>> members (on the TC list or the PR feedback list) be logged as new issues > >>>> in the new component/subcomponent. > >>>> > >>> With what bar for opening the issue? Still 2/3? > >>> > >> We had discussed this when we created the 2/3rd majority standing rule > >> and the general sense of the TC was that the 2/3rd majority rule ends > >> with PR. The rationale for that was: PR allows a non-member to send any > >> comment they want. It would not make sense to have a higher bar for > >> members. So no 2/3rd rule once we go PR, is what I'm proposing. But we > >> should discuss this during the call reaffirm this (or not). > >> > >> -Anish > >> -- > >> > >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that > >> generates this mail. Follow this link to all your TCs in OASIS at: > >> https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that > generates this mail. Follow this link to all your TCs in OASIS at: > https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]