[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [soa-rm] [Please indicate if you believe pulse check would bevaluable] RE: [soa-rm] Service-Orientation, SOA, RM vs. RA,etc.: Suggestion To Bring Us Closer Together
Apoligies - the vote is not open until tonight. I guess it will announce itself. Duane Duane Nickull wrote: > There is now a ballot set up to vote on this. I am not sure why it has > not yet sent out a message announcing itself. > > All members who have attended 3 of the last 5 meetings are eligible to > vote. This is relaxed from the requirement to be a voting member. > > Please go to Kavi under the ballots area and vite according to your > preference. > > Thanks > > Duane > > Chiusano Joseph wrote: > >> Totals from responses so far: >> Y: 6 >> N: 1 (with additional information provided) >> Joe >> Joseph Chiusano >> Booz Allen Hamilton >> Visit us online@ http://www.boozallen.com <http://www.boozallen.com/> >> >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> *From:* Chiusano Joseph [mailto:chiusano_joseph@bah.com] >> *Sent:* Friday, May 20, 2005 12:09 PM >> *To:* soa-rm@lists.oasis-open.org >> *Subject:* RE: [soa-rm] [Please indicate if you believe pulse >> check would be valuable] RE: [soa-rm] Service-Orientation, SOA, RM >> vs. RA, etc.: Suggestion To Bring Us Closer Together >> >> Sure - everything you need to know is in: >> http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/soa-rm/200505/msg00514.html >> Joe >> Joseph Chiusano >> Booz Allen Hamilton >> Visit us online@ http://www.boozallen.com >> <http://www.boozallen.com/> >> >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> *From:* Behera, Prasanta [mailto:pbehera@visa.com] >> *Sent:* Friday, May 20, 2005 11:46 AM >> *To:* Chiusano Joseph; soa-rm@lists.oasis-open.org >> *Subject:* RE: [soa-rm] [Please indicate if you believe pulse >> check would be valuable] RE: [soa-rm] Service-Orientation, >> SOA, RM vs. RA, etc.: Suggestion To Bring Us Closer Together >> >> I would like the mail to list the issues (“these” is not >> clear). We had tons of email today and it is hard to catch up. >> It will be nice if you can resend the mail specifying the issues >> >> Thanks, >> >> /Prasanta >> >> -----Original Message----- >> *From:* Chiusano Joseph [mailto:chiusano_joseph@bah.com] >> *Sent:* Friday, May 20, 2005 6:26 AM >> *To:* soa-rm@lists.oasis-open.org >> *Subject:* [soa-rm] [Please indicate if you believe pulse >> check would be valuable] RE: [soa-rm] Service-Orientation, >> SOA, RM vs. RA, etc.: Suggestion To Bring Us Closer Together >> >> Thanks Matt. >> >> TC members: If you believe that a "pulse check" to see where >> we collectively stand on these fundamental issues would be >> valuable (i.e. is our current RM depicting SOA or is it >> depicting service orientation, what is SOA, etc.) please >> indicate this asap. Please note that this is not asking what >> is your view, but would a quick pulse check to get the current >> overall TC view be valuable to our process moving forward. >> >> To make it easy: You can "reply all" to this e-mail with a >> simply "Yes" (a pulse check would be valuable) or "No" (a >> pulse check would not be valuable). Or even Y or N, to save >> typing effort. ;) >> >> Silence will indicate indifference. >> >> Thanks! >> >> Joe >> >> Joseph Chiusano >> >> Booz Allen Hamilton >> >> Visit us online@ http://www.boozallen.com >> <http://www.boozallen.com/> >> >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> >> *From:* Matthew MacKenzie [mailto:mattm@adobe.com] >> *Sent:* Friday, May 20, 2005 9:15 AM >> *To:* Chiusano Joseph >> *Cc:* soa-rm@lists.oasis-open.org >> *Subject:* Re: [soa-rm] Service-Orientation, SOA, RM vs. RA, >> etc.: Suggestion To Bring Us Closer Together >> >> Joe, >> >> This can play out in one of two ways: >> >> 1) Overwhelming interest by TC members on the email list makes >> it obvious that discussion is required immediately. I've not >> seen that yet. Could happen today. If I see that, I think I >> can put up an informal poll because it would be obvious that >> many folks think we need a "pulse check". >> >> 2) Your agenda request is noted by Duane when he gets this >> message, and if (1) doesn't somehow resolve the issue, it can >> be resolved at the next meeting. The issue probably shouldn't >> be about the poll, the issue in this case should probably be >> the subject of the poll. >> >> -Matt >> >> On 20-May-05, at 9:05 AM, Chiusano Joseph wrote: >> >> >> >> Thanks Matt - whom do I see to get this idea on the next >> meeting agenda? Or if it is easier, I would like to please >> make the request now that whoever creates the next agenda >> includes this idea. >> >> Clarification: Would the vote ask whether or not this "pulse >> check" should be done? Or would the pulse check itself act as >> the vote? I am fine either way - just want to follow our >> procedures. If we do the pulse check then as a TC member, I >> accept, honor, and respect the results whatever they may be. >> It's just the right now when I am asked about what this TC is >> developing, all I can say is "we are not sure" because we do >> not have consensus on what SOA is, what a reference model is, >> etc. At least with this mechanism I will be able to say "our >> consensus is that SOA is X", and "our consensus is that a >> reference model is Y", etc. >> >> Not worried about heckling - after all, I used to do a comedy >> show every Sat. night through the mid-to-late 80s with Jay >> Mohr. One of us used to get heckled (although my "Newark, >> Newark" song parody used to get good responses - sometimes;) >> >> Joe (An Italian-American who watches C-SPAN instead of Friends >> after work) >> >> Kind Regards, >> >> Joseph Chiusano >> >> Booz Allen Hamilton >> >> Visit us online@ http://www.boozallen.com >> <http://www.boozallen.com/> >> >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> >> *From:* Matthew MacKenzie [mailto:mattm@adobe.com] >> *Sent:* Friday, May 20, 2005 7:36 AM >> *To:* Chiusano Joseph >> *Cc:* Duane Nickull; soa-rm@lists.oasis-open.org >> <mailto:soa-rm@lists.oasis-open.org> >> *Subject:* Re: [soa-rm] Service-Orientation, SOA, RM vs. RA, >> etc.: Suggestion To Bring Us Closer Together >> >> Joe, >> >> 1. Get your idea on the next meeting agenda. >> >> 2. Attend said meeting. >> >> 3. Bring forward a motion, and ask for a eligible person to >> second it. >> >> 4. It will be put to vote. >> >> Parliamentary process is wonderful, but you have to expect >> lots of heckling and disagreement. >> >> -Matt (A Canadian who watches C-SPAN instead of Friends after >> work) >> >> On 20-May-05, at 6:51 AM, Chiusano Joseph wrote: >> >> >> >> <Quote> >> >> This is the TC process at work. Can we please give it a chance? >> </Quote> >> >> Please clarify why you believe that a TC member asking that we >> poll the TC informally to gain clarification on issues that >> are fundamental to the TC's mission is outside of the normal >> TC process. >> >> Joe >> >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> >> *From:* Duane Nickull [mailto:dnickull@adobe.com] >> *Sent:* Thu 5/19/2005 11:27 PM >> *Cc:* soa-rm@lists.oasis-open.org >> <mailto:soa-rm@lists.oasis-open.org> >> *Subject:* Re: [soa-rm] Service-Orientation, SOA, RM vs. RA, >> etc.: Suggestion To Bring Us Closer Together >> >> The current draft is a work in progress and we are actively >> editing it >> now. It will change to reflect TC consensus. What else do you >> want? >> This is the TC process at work. Can we please give it a chance? >> >> None of us have stated that our current draft is truly SOA, >> nor should >> we until we have TC consensus. >> >> Duane >> >> Chiusano Joseph wrote: >> >>> I would be very willing to take on documenting it, but there is a >>> prerequisite that is missing, which was part of my message in this >>> thread - and that is coming to agreement within the TC as >> >> whether our >> >>> current RM is truly SOA - which also has a prerequisite of >> >> coming to >> >>> aggrement within the TC on what we believe SOA is (is more than 1 >>> service required to have SOA, are shared services a fundamental >>> component, etc.). Our current draft states that SOA is a type >> >> of EA, and >> >>> we have already determined (I believe) that that is not the case. >>> >>> Kind Regards, >>> Joseph Chiusano >>> Booz Allen Hamilton >>> Visit us online@ http://www.boozallen.com >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: Duane Nickull [mailto:dnickull@adobe.com] >>>> Sent: Thursday, May 19, 2005 11:08 PM >>>> Cc: soa-rm@lists.oasis-open.org >>> >> <mailto:soa-rm@lists.oasis-open.org> >> >>>> Subject: Re: [soa-rm] Service-Orientation, SOA, RM vs. RA, >>>> etc.: Suggestion To Bring Us Closer Together >>>> >>>> Joseph: >>>> >>>> I will concur that the definition between RA and RM could use >>>> documenting. Is that a task you may be willing to take on? >>>> >>>> Duane >>>> >>>> Chiusano Joseph wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> Duane, >>>>> >>>>> I would like to make a suggestion to help clear up the current >>>>> division in our TC on some basic issues, which I believe is >>>> >> truly >> >>>>> inhibiting our ability to move forward in a unified way - >>>> >> and will >> >>>>> continue to do so unless we address it at this time. >>>>> >>>>> The most prominent division that I have perceived over the >>>>> >>>>> >>>> course of >>>> >>>> >>>>> several weeks is: "If we are defining a reference model, >>>> >> what is it >> >>>>> for? Is it for a single service? (call this >>>>> >>>>> >>>> "service-orientation") or >>>> >>>> >>>>> SOA?" IOW, "Is it SO-RM, or SOA-RM?" >>>>> >>>>> The second most prominent division that I have perceived >>>> >> over the >> >>>>> course of several weeks is: "Where is the line drawn between >>>> >> RM and >> >>>>> RA?". Last week I began a thread[1] on this question, and I >>>>> >>>>> >>>> thank all >>>> >>>> >>>>> who contributed (Matt, Duane, Ken, Rex, Francis, any others >>>>> >>>>> >>>> I missed). >>>> >>>> >>>>> However, I think we really need to drill down into this >>>>> >>>>> >>>> question more >>>> >>>> >>>>> and have a crystal clear answer before we go any farther, >>>>> >>>>> >>>> else run the >>>> >>>> >>>>> risk of creating an RM that cannot easily "bridge to" an RA. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]