OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

wsbpel-reqts message

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]

Subject: RE: [wsbpel-reqts] splitting issues

Title: Message
Sounds good in general, to keep everything clear, as you suggest.
In investigating how feasible, it was easier to do it - won't show up until acted on.
It's easier to make the subissues 103.1 rather than 103.a, as the sorting works out easily (  I hope we don't go beyond 9 subissues)
I've made it so I can create a subissue from an existing one, then add whatever entries are needed. The intent was that a proposed partial resolution would cause a split, leaving the parent unchanged (and typically open). Presumably the subissue description would only need to define the scope of the subissue, rather than having to go through all the details (though it could if appropriate)
We could also (as a tc) just decide to split an issue, when there wasn't a current proposal
I guess the parent issue wouldn't close until all its daughters closed - even though a daughter might cover 90% of the problem area.
It would be possible to have daughter issues that overlapped (when there are different proposals for aspects of the parent), though one hopes the tc would not pass an inconsistent set.
If a daughter is split, a sister is created, not a grand-daughter of the original (thus avoiding issue numbers like 103.2.1)
It may take a few iterations to get things automated - which would require a new pattern in the subject line for the proposed partial resolution. I currently allow some flexibility there (Issue 123 - Proposed resolution and Issue 123 - Proposal to ...) both work. Perhaps "Issue 123 - Proposed partial resolution" would cause the proposal to be applied to a newly split 123.n.
At first, I can work out the splitter commands by hand though.
As an example, I've split the april fool issue 116 (I'll take this out again later)
 -----Original Message-----
From: Diane Jordan [mailto:drj@us.ibm.com]
Sent: 29 September 2004 18:10
To: bpel rqmts
Subject: [wsbpel-reqts] splitting issues

It seems as we're getting into some complex issues, people are interested in offering partial resolutions to make progress without closing the entire original issue.  I think this is good.  However, how it brings up questions about how we should handle the issues.  We've opened new related issues in some cases.  This doesn't necessarily reflect the close tie between parts of an issue.   In others we just left the issue open (or closed and reopened), and had some resulting confusion about whehter there was work left to be done.  I'd also like to make sure we have a sense of how many sub issues are being split off.
I've been thinking about the ability to identify parts of issues with letters/dot numbers - eg, issue 103 a or  103.1 etc.  and asking those who provide a partial resolution to also provide the sub issue descriptions when they propose the partial solution.  
Peter, would this even be possible in our list?    
If so, what does this subgroup think?  We'll have our regular call next week and can discuss then, or let us know by email.
Regards, Diane
IBM  Emerging Internet Software Standards
(919)254-7221 or 8-444-7221, Mobile: 919-624-5123, Fax 845-491-5709
Choreology Anti virus scan completed

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]