Re: Fw: [wsbpel-spec-edit] Done with changes mentioned in the last editorsconf call

[Diane Jordan <drj@us.ibm.com>]

I'd like to see us get to where everytime
the TC approves a draft, it is refreshed with no change marks, so that
the next time there is an update for review and approval, the only mark
ups will be the delta from the last approved draft.  
Does this make sense?
(And as I noted before, I seem to recall
there were issues with this approach in one of the TC meetings, but I can't
remember what they were.)  
Regards, Diane
IBM  Emerging Internet Software Standards
drj@us.ibm.com
(919)254-7221 or 8-444-7221, Mobile: 919-624-5123, Fax 845-491-5709

Prasad Yendluri <pyendluri@webmethods.com>

09/02/2004 06:03 PM

To	Satish Thatte <satisht@microsoft.com>
cc	bpel spec <wsbpel-spec-edit@lists.oasis-open.org>
Subject	Re: Fw: [wsbpel-spec-edit] Done with changes mentioned in the last editors conf call

Satish Thatte wrote:
Sorry to be so off the cuff
about this.  What I had in mind was the following:
 
A.        We
follow our usual tracking process most of the time with changes shown using
word tracking.
B.        Every
once in a while we decide that enough changes have accumulated and decide
to make a clean copy.  This is a revision number by itself that just
takes a spec (say version 1.35) and checks in the same spec with all changes
accepted (as version 1.36), stating in the row for 1.36 that this was a
clean copy revision.  Which means the content was unchanged from 1.35.
C.        For
each revision we have a new column that shows the clean copy revision that
it started from.  Thus 1.37, 1.38 and 1.39 might all show 1.36 as
the origin clean copy.
 
Is that better?

Yes, thanks.

---

From: Prasad Yendluri [mailto:pyendluri@webmethods.com]
Sent: Thursday, September 02, 2004 2:36 PM
To: Satish Thatte
Cc: Alex Yiu; Diane Jordan; bpel spec
Subject: Re: Fw: [wsbpel-spec-edit] Done with changes mentioned in
the last editors conf call
 
Hi Satish,

Satish Thatte wrote:
I have no problem with doing
the accept-all-changes now if you want to do it Alex.  A clean copy
would be nice.  We have the history in the previous versions.  And
we can make a note of that in the change log in the document for the clean
version.
If we archive the copy with the changes
tracked as a specific milestone
then we can create a new copy, right?
 We can even create a separate new
clean copy sequence numbers log in
the spec if we need to.
  
Sorry to be thick but, can you
be more specific on the process above?  

On accepting changes, each version is archived separately in CVS but, we
have been distributing copies with change tracking in, so that people can
see the changes made. Now if we accept all changes that should be done
on a version that the TC has seen on voted up on (and accepted etc.), so
that change tracking is effective from that reference point. If we accept
all changes at this point would it confuse people? as we changed things
substantially since the last accepted version. Just wondering..

Prasad