Re: passing the pen to Assaf

["Yaron Y. Goland" <ygoland@bea.com>]

I just submitted the proposal for 108.

I've also go the pen.

	Yaron

Satish Thatte wrote:
> Please propose the 108 closure.
> 
> Yes, we will have to explain in simpler words what the resolution says.
> The formal statement needs to remain as the authoritative precise
> definition.  I tried to put in some informal explanations, but they were
> probably still too formal .. ;-)
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Yaron Y. Goland [mailto:ygoland@bea.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, November 23, 2004 12:08 PM
> To: Satish Thatte
> Cc: bpel spec; drj@us.ibm.com
> Subject: Re: passing the pen to Assaf
> 
> I reviewed the issue 10 text (btw, there is exactly 0% chance that any
> normal implementer will understand what is said there, we need to figure
> 
> out how to massage the text to make it readable by normal programmers
> who haven't cracked open their college textbooks in a decade or more)
> and I agree that it makes issue 108 redundant. We should close 108 as no
> 
> change to the spec.
> 
>         Yaron
> 
> Satish Thatte wrote:
>  > Yaron,
>  > 
>  > As a result of incorporating 10, I believe 108 is now redundant.  Do
> you agree?
>  > 
>  > Also, as soon as 168 is resolved we should revisit 81 and 120.
>  > 
>  > Satish
>  > 
>  > 
>  > 
>  >
>  >
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> --------
>  > *From:* Satish Thatte
>  > *Sent:* Thursday, November 18, 2004 9:14 PM
>  > *To:* 'bpel spec'
>  > *Cc:* 'Furniss, Peter'
>  > *Subject:* passing the pen to Assaf
>  >
>  > I have done two checkins, yesterday and today, for issues 10, 98, 135
> and 176.
>  > 
>  > Assaf, the pen is yours.
>  > 
>  > Peter, please mark those issues as being incorporated in the spec.
>  > 
>  > Satish
>  > 
>  > 
>  > 
>