Re: [sdd] Requirement 2.1.5.2

[Jay Nash <jay@o-ms.com>]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

John, Josh, all

Fix, Update, Upgrade,
All have specific definitions in the Glossary
Patch is not yet defined.  _Resource_ may be the term we can use to
incorporate all of the above.

If we mean to expand the requirement beyond the "Maintenance" section,
or make it less restrictive,  then maybe this language would work.

2.1.5.2 - The SDD must support the ability for the author to define
information about a resource that has been superseded by a maintenance
operation.

from

>> "The SDD specification must support the ability for the
>> author to define information about the fixes superseded or
>> obsoleted by the deployment of
>> fix(es) or updated versions."

Jay Nash

Patton, John H wrote:
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Josh Allen [mailto:jallen@macrovision.com] 
>> Sent: Wednesday, March 01, 2006 4:43 PM
>> To: sdd@lists.oasis-open.org
>> Subject: [sdd] Requirement 2.1.5.2
>>
>> I had an action item to send a rewording of requirement 
>> 2.1.5.2 which relates to superseded & obsoleted fixes.
>>
>> The text currently reads: "The SDD specification must support 
>> the ability for the author to define information about the 
>> fixes superseded or obsoleted by the deployment of a fix or fixes."
>>
>> First, I agree with the definitions that Debra sent in her 
>> recent document of superseded (replaced by approximate 
>> functionality) and obsoleted (no longer necessary at all).  I 
>> wonder if we need both concepts for fixes.  It seems that 
>> they may have the same semantics:
>> "this fix has what you need."  I'd recommend that we only 
>> have the concept of superseded fixes.  I think obsoletion is 
>> a great concept to apply to other things than fixes (like 
>> package content).
>>
>> Second, my issue with this requirement was that I felt it was 
>> too restrictive.  By saying "...by the deployment of a fix or 
>> fixes," we imply that past fixes can only be 
>> superseded/obsoleted by other fixes (as opposed to new 
>> versions).  I don't think we want that.
>>
>> I would recommend that the phrase read:
>> "The SDD specification must support the ability for the 
>> author to define information about the fixes superseded or 
>> obsoleted by the deployment of
>> fix(es) or updated versions."
>>
>> Would love to know the thoughts of the group.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Josh
>>
> 
> I like the rephrasing that you suggest.  The only question that I have
> is with the word "Fix".  Should we use this word, or should be use
> "patch" or "update" or "upgrade"?  They all seem to have different
> meanings, and I think those meanings need to be defined.  We could all
> agree that "fix" means any of "patch" "update" or "upgrade" and I'd be
> happy with that.
> 
> Nice work on this!
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> /john patton/
> 
> 
> 

- --
- --
Jay Nash, CTO
OMS SafeHarbor
128 Warren St
Lowell MA 01852
978.937.2363 ext.111
978.937.3784 fax

This message (including any attachments) contains confidential
information intended for a specific individual and purpose, and is
protected by law.  If you are not the intended recipient, you should
delete this message and are hereby notified that any disclosure,
copying, or distribution of this message, or the taking of any action
based on it, is strictly prohibited.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (Darwin)

iD8DBQFEBu5KHsIa/RmVc78RAnzfAJwOqSvhyDqCLdv08wup9rIV9/wKTwCgheP3
oRu+Jq0YXDuv2CBNrn9d2B8=
=h2Jw
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----