Subject: Re: [xacml] Schedule for XACML 3.0?
Hi Bill, Re: > pining away for an oasis issue tracking tool Can you describe the kind of tool that you would like to see provided for tracking status of TC issues? (Or: name one that you'd want to use?) I think the editors of these issues lists probably use standard editing tools for XML, and the output is pretty nice: WS Reliable Messaging Working Issues List http://docs.oasis-open.org/ws-rx/issues/ReliableMessagingIssues.xml WS-SX TC Issues List http://docs.oasis-open.org/ws-sx/issues/Issues.xml WS-TX TC Issues List http://docs.oasis-open.org/ws-tx/issues/WSTransactionIssues.xml Cheers, Robin ---------------------- On Mon, 27 Nov 2006, Bill Parducci wrote: > i think this is a good idea. if there is general consensus i'll set > aside time on the next meeting's agenda to discuss. > > as an aside, i think the wiki supports tables. if so i can setup a > simple 'score card' for the issues to make it easier to track the satus > of each (he says, pining away for an oasis issue tracking tool for this > very purpose ;) > > b > > Erik Rissanen wrote: > > All, > > > > I have been thinking a bit about the progress of XACML 3.0. It has been > > quite slow this year. I am guilty of that myself since I haven't always > > had the time to work as much on XACML as I would like to. > > > > However, I think it would be beneficial for our work if we could adopt a > > practice of assigning projected completion dates on work items in the > > issues list. This way we have a schedule which provides some incentives > > to do work. Otherwise it is easy that XACML work gets pushed back every > > time since it doesn't feel like it matters since there is no due date. > > Also, if the items are not completed on projected time, we will notice. > > Now things get silently pushed back and delays creep up on us without us > > really noticing. > > > > A schedule is also a tool to plan our work and see what are realistic > > goals to make. > > > > Of course, we have to be flexible with the schedule, but I prefer a > > schedule which slips to having no schedule at all. > > > > What do you think? > > > > If you think this is a good idea, I suggest that we go through the > > issues list and decide what we want to include in 3.0 and decide when we > > want 3.0 to be ready and then assign dates on individual items, so the > > whole adds up to a realistic finish date. > > > > Best regards, > > Erik > > > > -- > VP Technical Services > Simula Labs - The Open Source Venture Partners > 4676 Admiralty Way, Suite 520 > Marina del Rey, CA 90292 > t: +1 310 437-4888 > f: +1 800 822-0471 >