Martin Chapman wrote:
> With a strict chair hat on, we really need to look at the broader
> schedule here.
>
> In order to progress to Committee Specification we need at least two
> implementations passing the tests and showing some kind of interop.
>
> As a Chair I have no idea when two implementations will surface to meet
> this criteria.
>
>
>
> If they surface soon I share the schedule concerns expressed by others.
>
> If two implementations are not on the near horizon, then I see no
> problem in discussing resolutions to issue-80.
>
Let's say the specs are complete at time T. Two implementations will
be available at time T+n, where n depends on the amount of function in
the specs and the maturity/stability of that function (i.e., whether
implementers have been able to use previous spec drafts to get a
head start on their implementations).
If we take the current 1.1 drafts forward without adding events,
I think n will be quite small because the function in the current drafts
is now mature and has been largely stable for a while.
If we add a large new chunk of functionality now, it will push out T.
It will also increase n, because implementers will have had less time
to absorb/prototype/start developing the new functionality. So not
only will the spec completion date be delayed, but there will also
be a longer gap (after that later date) before two compliant and
interoperable implementations become available.
Simon
>
>
> Martin.
>
>
>
> *From:* Mike Edwards [mailto:]
> *Sent:* 23 June 2009 10:13
> *To:* OASIS Assembly
> *Subject:* Re: [sca-assembly] [Issue 80] Proposed directional resolution
>
>
>
>
> Anish,
>
> Thank you for your proposal.
>
> Can I ask for your assessment on the likely impact of this approach to
> the schedule of completion of the
> OASIS SCA Assembly Model specification V1.1 and also for your assessment
> of the likely impact to the
> schedules of the other affected specifications?
>
>
> Yours, Mike.
>
> Strategist - Emerging Technologies, SCA & SDO.
> Co Chair OASIS SCA Assembly TC.
> IBM Hursley Park, Mail Point 146, Winchester, SO21 2JN, Great Britain.
> Phone & FAX: +44-1962-818014 Mobile: +44-7802-467431
> Email:
>
> From:
>
>
>
> Anish Karmarkar <>
>
> To:
>
>
>
> OASIS Assembly <>
>
> Date:
>
>
>
> 22/06/2009 18:52
>
> Subject:
>
>
>
> [sca-assembly] [Issue 80] Proposed directional resolution
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
>
> I would like to propose that we use the contribution at [2], as a basis
> for a directional resolution for issue 80 [1]. Specifically, we
> introduce the concepts of events, event types, producers, consumers,
> channels; and the changes these concepts make to the existing
> composite/component/componentType/constrainingType constructs.
>
> If this directional resolution is accepted, I suggest that an inlined
> document (with change marks) be produced that provides a merge between
> [2] and the existing latest version of SCA Assembly. This would then
> serve as a basis for the resolution of issue 80.
>
> Comments?
>
> -Anish
> --
>
> [1] http://www.osoa.org/jira/browse/ASSEMBLY-80
> [2]
> http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/sca-assembly/download.php/32379/SCA_Assembly_Extensions_for_Event_Processing_and_PubSub_V1_0.pdf
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
> /Unless stated otherwise above:
> IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number
> 741598.
> Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU/
>
>
>
>
>
