RE: [sdd] 2.2.1.11 - ATTENTION JOHN .

["Patton, John H" <John.Patton@ca.com>]

No problem.  I now agree with the rest of yous.

Cheers,

/john patton/

--
ca
Senior Software Engineer
Office: 630 505-6150
Cell: 847-224-9196
john.patton@ca.com

 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: julia@us.ibm.com [mailto:julia@us.ibm.com] 
> Sent: Thursday, March 16, 2006 12:28 PM
> To: sdd@lists.oasis-open.org
> Subject: [sdd] 2.2.1.11 - ATTENTION JOHN .
> 
> Josh and I disagreed with the second alternative for 2.2.11. 
> John disagreed with the first. The alternatives are identical 
> except for inclusion of a header "Progress Feedback" in the 
> first alternative.
> 
> The rest of the 2.2.1.x requirements include a header similar 
> to Progress Feedback:. John, could you remove your 
> disagreement and accept the alternative that is consistent 
> with the rest of the 2.2.1.x group?
> 
> Here are the two alternatives so you don't have to look them up:
> 
> 1) 2.2.1.11 Progress Feedback: The SDD specification must 
> support the definition of the information to allow a 
> provisioning application or installation program to construct 
> relevant feedback for progress, dependency check failures, 
> and change execution failures.UC: 36, 37, 44, 53, 136
> 
> 2) 2.2.1.11 The SDD specification must support definition of 
> the information to allow a provisioning application or 
> installation program to construct relevant feedback for 
> progress, dependency check failures, and change execution failures.
>