AW: RE: [tosca] spec errata

[Frank Leymann <frank.leymann@informatik.uni-stuttgart.de>]

The V1.0.1 solution removes my concerns :-)  Time to market is of utmost importance. 

Gruss/Regards,

Frank   


-------- Ursprüngliche Nachricht --------
Von: Gerd Breiter <GBREITER@de.ibm.com> 
Datum: 26.04.2013  10:55  (GMT+01:00) 
An: Derek Palma <dpalma@vnomic.com> 
Cc: tosca@lists.oasis-open.org 
Betreff: RE: [tosca] spec errata 
 

+1



Regards,
Gerd


IBM Distinguished Engineer
Chief Architect Cloud Computing,
Cloud & Smarter Infrastructure CTO Office
Member IBM Academy of Technology
Phone 49-7031-16-4997, gbreiter@de.ibm.com

IBM Deutschland Research & Development GmbH / Vorsitzende des
Aufsichtsrats: Martina Koederitz
Geschäftsführung: Dirk Wittkopp
Sitz der Gesellschaft: Böblingen / Registergericht: Amtsgericht Stuttgart,
HRB 243294




From:	"Derek Palma" <dpalma@vnomic.com>
To:	<tosca@lists.oasis-open.org>,
Date:	26.04.2013 06:50
Subject:	RE: [tosca] spec errata
Sent by:	<tosca@lists.oasis-open.org>



+1 Doug

From: tosca@lists.oasis-open.org [mailto:tosca@lists.oasis-open.org] On
Behalf Of Probst, Richard
Sent: Thursday, April 25, 2013 9:44 PM
To: Doug Davis; tosca@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: RE: [tosca] spec errata

This sure makes a lot of sense to me.

Best,
  --Richard

Richard Probst
VP Infrastructure Architecture
SAP
+1.650.320.3250
richard.probst@sap.com


From: tosca@lists.oasis-open.org [mailto:tosca@lists.oasis-open.org] On
Behalf Of Doug Davis
Sent: Thursday, April 25, 2013 10:36 AM
To: tosca@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: [tosca] spec errata



On today's call we talked briefly about erratas and minor editorial
changes.  If I understand our current state, we today voted to push wd16
out the door and to start the process of making it our proposed oasis v1.0
spec.  It seems to me that we can deal with these minor edits if we simply
follow the oasis process.  Meaning, the TC decides at some point to roll-up
a group of edits into a WD, then we start the process of it being a CS and
then OASIS Spec (calling it v1.0.1).  Since that process will take a bit of
time, it will finish after v1.0 is published.  We can then iterate on this
process as many times as we'd like to pick-up additional edits that I'm
sure people will find as they read/implement the spec.

Can we not follow this process?

I don't think we need to wait for v1.0 to be an oasis spec before we start
working on a v1.0.1 - we can always put a pre-condition on its being
released; that being v1.0 actually makes it out the door.  I've seen other
oasis specs have preconditions as they go thru the process.

I understand Frank's concern about having an updated spec come out too
soon, but given it'll be a v1.0.1 and not a major (or even minor) version
number update, I don't think that's an issue. I think getting some of these
fixes in would be appreciated by new people reading the spec.  We just need
to be judicious in which edits we allow.

thanks
-Doug
________________________________________________________
STSM |  Standards Architect  |  IBM Software Group
(919) 254-6905  |  IBM 444-6905  |  dug@us.ibm.com
The more I'm around some people, the more I like my dog.




---------------------------------------------------------------------
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