Scott, Bob,
I checked the excel template Scott proposed
to record the comments from the public review. I also looked at the jira
issue tracker (I pasted the help window below). I think we should use jira
as it is more comprehensive, provided that:
- non-TC members can also enter comments,
but it seems that only TC members can use jira, so someone from the TC
will have to do that on their behalf, and
- jira is configured to have the right
projects/components (one for each of the docs) and issue types (ie 60-day
public review comment), but I don't have admin rights to change that.
(see http://tools.oasis-open.org/issues/browse/KMIP?report=select)
For purely editorial comments, it is
probably an overkill asking the commenters to enter a jira issue for each
one of them. In this case I'd suggest that an email to the list is sufficient.
Regards,
-Robert
JIRA - Local
help
JIRA tracks issues, which
can be bugs, feature requests, or any other tasks you want to track.
Each issue has a variety of associated information
including:
the issue
type
a summary
a description of the issue
the project which the issue belongs to
components
within a project which are associated with this issue
versions
of the project which are affected by this issue
versions of the project which will resolve
the issue
the environment in which it occurs
a priority
for being fixed
an assigned developer to work on the task
a reporter - the user who entered the issue
into the system
the current status
of the issue
a full history log of all field changes that
have occurred
a comment trail added by users
if the issue is resolved - the resolution
Issue Types
JIRA can be used to track many different types
of issues. The currently defined issue types are listed below. In addition,
you can add more in the administration section.
For Regular Issues
15-day
Public Review
60-day
Public Review
Approved
Errata
Bug
A problem which impairs or prevents the functions
of the product.
CS
Ballot
Chair
Election
Charter
Clarification Ballot
Closing
a TC
Create
Subcommittee
Discussion
List
Document
Upload
Errata
Review
Improvement
An improvement or enhancement to an existing
feature or task.
Informal
Public Review
New
Feature
A new feature of the product, which has yet
to be developed.
New
TC Charter Submission
OS
Submission
OS
Submission Ballot
TC
Close
Task
A task that needs to be done.
For Sub-Task Issues
Sub-task
The sub-task of the issue
Priority Levels
An issue has a priority level which indicates
its importance. The currently defined priorities are listed below. In addition,
you can add more priority levels in the administration section.
Blocker
Blocks development and/or testing work, production
could not run.
Critical
Crashes, loss of data, severe memory leak.
Major
Major loss of function.
Minor
Minor loss of function, or other problem
where easy workaround is present.
Trivial
Cosmetic problem like misspelt words or misaligned
text.
Statuses
Each issue has a status, which indicates the
stage of the issue. In the default workflow, issues start as being Open,
progressing to In Progress, Resolved and then Closed. Other workflows may
have other status transitions.
Open
The issue is open and ready for the assignee
to start work on it.
In
Progress
This issue is being actively worked on at
the moment by the assignee.
Reopened
This issue was once resolved, but the resolution
was deemed incorrect. From here issues are either marked assigned or resolved.
Resolved
A resolution has been taken, and it is awaiting
verification by reporter. From here issues are either reopened, or are
closed.
Closed
The issue is considered finished, the resolution
is correct. Issues which are closed can be reopened.
New
Deferred
Applied
submission
review
document
check
QC of document(s)
document
upload
upload/testing of files at docs.oasis-open.org
announce
announcement to members or TC
familiarization
announce
member
ballot creation/announce
member
ballot results announce
TC
hold
TC
ballot launch
DCR
dependencies hold
create
kavi group
charter
review
call
for nominations
member
charter review
convener
call
final
charter/log submission
Call
for Participation
capture
voting roster
first
meeting
create
mail list
close
mail list
close
kavi group
charter
upload
document
update
Resolutions
An issue can be resolved in many ways, only
one of them being "Fixed". The defined resolutions are listed
below. You can add more in the administration section.
Fixed
A fix for this issue is checked into the
tree and tested.
Won't Fix
The problem described is an issue which will
never be fixed.
Duplicate
The problem is a duplicate of an existing
issue.
Incomplete
The problem is not completely described.
Cannot Reproduce
All attempts at reproducing this issue failed,
or not enough information was available to reproduce the issue. Reading
the code produces no clues as to why this behavior would occur. If more
information appears later, please reopen the issue.
Unresolved
Applied
No Action
Invalid
Later
From:
Scott Kipp <>
To:
Mary McRae <>
Cc:
""
<>, OASIS TAB <>
Date:
12/14/2009 02:39 PM
Subject:
RE: [kmip] Public Review of KMIP Specifications
Bob Griffin,
Should we just email a list of comments to the reflector then?
I have seen standards bodies do this but I don't think it works very well.
Kind regards,
Scott
-----Original Message-----
From: Mary McRae [mailto:]
Sent: Friday, December 11, 2009 12:59 PM
To: Scott Kipp
Cc: ; OASIS TAB
Subject: Re: [kmip] Public Review of KMIP Specifications
Hi Scott,
The only requirement is that all feedback from TC members must be
made on the TC email list. Note that creating an issue in JIRA automatically
sends an email to the list so that requirement is addressed.
As far as determining a methodology for JIRA setup and use, I can
only point you to other TCs that are using JIRA to manage the process;
you should feel free to contact any of the chairs for more details. On
the OASIS internal issues tracker, CMIS and ODF are probably the two most
prolific. The SCA TCs have an externally-hosted JIRA system they use (they
were using it prior to coming to OASIS and we did not yet have our own
installation in place); you can see it at http://www.osoa.org/jira/secure/Dashboard.jspa
There is a lot of wonderful documentation on the atlassian site.
http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira/docs/v3.13.1/introduction.html
Mary
On Dec 11, 2009, at 12:01 PM, Scott Kipp wrote:
> Hello Mary,
>
> I was trying to understand the process of how we submit comments as
members. I asked this yesterday and didn't hear to use JIRA. I expect
many people to review this thoroughly for the first time and submit many
comments.
>
> We have been informal in how we resolved comments up until now and
I think this could be problematic if we are inundated with hundreds of
comments like in Indra's attached email. If these comments or any comments
were entered in JIRA, I never heard about it.
>
> How do we use the JIRA issue tracking system? How do we make
documents a "component"?
>
> Are the editors going to enter JIRA issues for each comment from non-TC
members?
>
> Thanks,
> Scott
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mary McRae [mailto:]
> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2009 1:51 PM
> To: Scott Kipp
> Cc: ; OASIS TAB
> Subject: Re: [kmip] Public Review of KMIP Specifications
>
> Hi Scott,
>
> I'm not sure who you're addressing your message to. Non-TC members
will submit their comments via the TC comment list as required by the OASIS
TC Process. TC members can make use of the JIRA issue tracking system -
just make each of the documents a 'component' and that will allow for easy
sorting/filtering. For comments received via the comment list, someone
on the TC would need to create a corresponding issue.
>
> The ODF TC actually posts a periodic note to the comment list
which lets people know that their comments will be entered into the issues
tracker and that they can track their status themselves.
>
> I haven't seen this to be a big issue with most TCs; maybe you're
anticipating many more issues to be raised. In any case, the TC is required
to produce a comment resolution log which includes the comment submitter,
brief description of the issue, and its resolution before moving forward
to the next level of approval. Again, this can be easily generated out
of JIRA.
>
> I hope that helps.
>
> Regards,
>
> Mary
>
>
>
>
>
> On Dec 10, 2009, at 12:49 PM, Scott Kipp wrote:
>
>> Dear KMIP Commenters,
>>
>> I'm involved in five standards organizations and there is no standard
way to submit comments across these bodies. Since we are in the process
of reviewing 4 documents by tens of companies, tracking and resolving comments
(probably hundreds and possibly thousands) in many formats across the four
documents could be very time consuming for the group and especially the
editors. If some companies submit comments in pdf, others in word
and some in html, we will have a difficult time tracking the resolution
of comments.
>>
>> I propose that we use the attached spreadsheet to submit comments
against the pdf version of the document. The spreadsheet has a separate
worksheet for each document so that each editor can individually address
their comments.
>>
>> The comments are split into technical and editorial. Editorial
comments are basic grammatical corrections that editors don't need the
group input on. Technical comments require the groups input and approval
for inclusion.
>>
>> I have provided two sample comments to explain the process. You
should add the name of your company in place of the "Company Name"
in the first column so that you will be able to track your comments through
the process. Then label the comment technical (T) or Editorial (E)
in the second column. The next three columns identify the location
of the comment. Then you need to add the description of the comment
and the proposed solution of the comment.
>>
>> During comment resolution, the editor or chair of the document
will include the resolution and we'll be able to track and understand what
happened to the comment. This tracking is very important because
I have been in some standards that take a year to resolve comments and
this spreadsheet helps track the comments down after many moons. There
is also a Status worksheet that can summarize how many technical comments
we have and how many have been resolved or deferred.
>>
>> I hope we can resolve our comments quicker than many months and
this spreadsheet will help. This is one way to track comments and I am
open to tracking them in a different manner. We should agree to use
one method.
>>
>> Any other suggestions or can we agree to use this spreadsheet?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Scott Kipp
>> Standards Jockey
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Mary McRae [mailto:]
>> Sent: Monday, November 30, 2009 10:48 PM
>> To: ;
>> Cc: ; OASIS TAB
>> Subject: [kmip] Public Review of KMIP Specifications
>>
>> To OASIS members, Public Announce Lists:
>>
>> The OASIS Key Management Interoperability Protocol (KMIP) TC has
recently approved the following specifications as Committee Drafts and
approved them for public review:
>>
>> Key Management Interoperability Protocol Specification Version
1.0
>> Key Management Interoperability Protocol Profiles Version 1.0
>> Key Management Interoperability Protocol Use Cases Version 1.0
>> Key Management Interoperability Protocol Usage Guide Version 1.0
>>
>> The public review starts today, 1 December 2009, and ends 30 January
2010. This is an open invitation to comment. We strongly encourage feedback
from potential users, developers and others, whether OASIS members or not,
for the sake of improving the interoperability and quality of OASIS work.
We also welcome interested parties to join the KMIP TC as it continues
work on the next version of KMIP in such areas as asymmetric profiles,
server-to-server communication, and other important areas. Please feel
free to distribute this announcement within your organization and to other
appropriate mail lists.
>>
>> More non-normative information about the specification and the
technical committee may be found at the public home page of the TC at:
>> http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/tc_home.php?wg_abbrev=kmip.
Comments may be submitted to the TC by any person through the use of the
OASIS TC Comment Facility which can be located via the button marked "Send
A Comment" at the top of that page, or directly at:
>> http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/comments/index.php?wg_abbrev=kmip.
>>
>> Submitted comments (for this work as well as other works of that
TC) are publicly archived and can be viewed at:
>> http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/kmip-comment/.
All comments submitted to OASIS are subject to the OASIS Feedback License,
which ensures that the feedback you provide carries the same obligations
at least as the obligations of the TC members.
>>
>> The specification document and related files are available here:
>>
>> Key Management Interoperability Protocol Specification Version
1.0
>> Editable Source: (Authoritative)
>> http://docs.oasis-open.org/kmip/spec/v1.0/cd06/kmip-spec-1.0-cd-06.doc
>> PDF:
>> http://docs.oasis-open.org/kmip/spec/v1.0/cd06/kmip-spec-1.0-cd-06.pdf
>> HTML:
>> http://docs.oasis-open.org/kmip/spec/v1.0/cd06/kmip-spec-1.0-cd-06.html
>>
>>
>> Key Management Interoperability Protocol Profiles Version 1.0
>> Editable Source: (Authoritative)
>> http://docs.oasis-open.org/kmip/profiles/v1.0/cd04/kmip-profiles-1.0-cd-04.doc
>> PDF:
>> http://docs.oasis-open.org/kmip/profiles/v1.0/cd04/kmip-profiles-1.0-cd-04.pdf
>> HTML:
>> http://docs.oasis-open.org/kmip/profiles/v1.0/cd04/kmip-profiles-1.0-cd-04.html
>>
>>
>> Key Management Interoperability Protocol Use Cases Version 1.0
>> Editable Source: (Authoritative)
>> http://docs.oasis-open.org/kmip/usecases/v1.0/cd05/kmip-usecases-1.0-cd-05.doc
>> PDF:
>> http://docs.oasis-open.org/kmip/usecases/v1.0/cd05/kmip-usecases-1.0-cd-05.pdf
>> HTML:
>> http://docs.oasis-open.org/kmip/usecases/v1.0/cd05/kmip-usecases-1.0-cd-05.html
>>
>>
>> Key Management Interoperability Protocol Usage Guide Version 1.0
>> Editable Source: (Authoritative)
>> http://docs.oasis-open.org/kmip/ug/v1.0/cd05/kmip-ug-1.0-cd-05.doc
>> PDF:
>> http://docs.oasis-open.org/kmip/ug/v1.0/cd05/kmip-ug-1.0-cd-05.pdf
>> HTML:
>> http://docs.oasis-open.org/kmip/ug/v1.0/cd05/kmip-ug-1.0-cd-05.html
>>
>>
>> OASIS and the KMIP TC welcome your comments.
>>
>>
>> Mary P McRae
>> Director, Standards Development
>> Technical Committee Administrator
>> OASIS: Advancing open standards for the information society
>> email:
>> web: www.oasis-open.org
>> twitter: @fiberartisan #oasisopen
>> phone: 1.603.232.9090
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> 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
>>
>> <KMIP Comments Template.xls>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> 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
>
> <[kmip] Comments and potential additions to the Usage Guide.eml>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
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
