Marc Goodner wrote:
> My interpretation of what owner means match yours. Right now there is a
> link from the origin for all of the issues; in a lot of them that is
> where the proposal is as well. In the next pass through and for the
> future I’ll be sure to include the link in the proposal section as well
> even if it has appeared earlier.
>
Thanks Marc!
This would be useful when there isn't a proposal in the origin or there
are multiple proposals (originating in different emails).
-Anish
--
PS: BTW, I completely missed out on the link from the origin. Since the
hyperlinked text is the originator's name, I assumed a 'mailto:...' URI
and did not bother to check (<insert-embarrassed-smiley-here>).
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> *From:* Anish Karmarkar [mailto:]
> *Sent:* Thursday, July 28, 2005 12:36 AM
> *To:* Marc Goodner
> *Cc:*
> *Subject:* Re: [ws-rx] Unowned issues
>
>
>
> Since I raised issues i002 and i003, I would be happy to be the owner.
>
> I'm assuming that the owner is supposed to stimulate discussion on the
> issue, keep track of the discussion, summarize the discussion/issue on
> the call, etc, but is not necessarily responsible for generating
> proposals/resolving the issues (although he/she may). Is that correct?
> (Although in the cases above, I would be willing to provide proposals.)
>
> Suggestion for Marc:
> In the issue list, can we have a link to the emails in the justification
> and proposal section. Currently, these two sections contain
> cut-and-pasted text from the emails. This is helpful in most cases, but
> sometimes it is necessary to look at the complete email/thread to get
> the right context.
>
> Thx.
>
> -Anish
> --
>
> Marc Goodner wrote:
>
> We need owners for the following issues:
>
>
>
> *i001
> <http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/download.php/13758/ReliableMessagingIssues.xml#i001#i001>
> *
>
>
>
> Bilateral sequence negotiation
>
> *i002
> <http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/download.php/13758/ReliableMessagingIssues.xml#i002#i002>
> *
>
>
>
> AckTo EPR and seq lifetime
>
> *i003
> <http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/download.php/13758/ReliableMessagingIssues.xml#i003#i003>
> *
>
>
>
> EPRs and sequence scope
>
> *i004
> <http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/download.php/13758/ReliableMessagingIssues.xml#i004#i004>
> *
>
>
>
> wsa:messageID uniqueness requirments for retransmission
>
> *i005
> <http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/download.php/13758/ReliableMessagingIssues.xml#i005#i005>
> *
>
>
>
> Source resend of nacks messages when ack already received
>
> *i007
> <http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/download.php/13758/ReliableMessagingIssues.xml#i007#i007>
> *
>
>
>
> WSS 1.0/1.1 token support
>
> *i010
> <http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/download.php/13758/ReliableMessagingIssues.xml#i010#i010>
> *
>
>
>
> Sequence port spanning
>
> *i012
> <http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/download.php/13758/ReliableMessagingIssues.xml#i012#i012>
> *
>
>
>
> Anonymous acksTo
>
> *i013
> <http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/download.php/13758/ReliableMessagingIssues.xml#i013#i013>
> *
>
>
>
> Max message number in policy
>
> *i018
> <http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/download.php/13758/ReliableMessagingIssues.xml#i018#i018>
> *
>
>
>
> Is an implementation supporting a smaller max message number valid?
>
> *i019
> <http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/download.php/13758/ReliableMessagingIssues.xml#i019#i019>
> *
>
>
>
> Sequence termination on Fault
>
>
>
> Gilbert Pilz has volunteered on the editor list to take i014 – i017.
>
>
>
> Personally I’ll volunteer to take i007 will review some the others for
> potentially volunteering prior to tomorrow’s call. I suggest others do
> the same.
>
>
>
> I propose that we should not allow issues to be accepted any longer
> without identifying an owner at the same time.
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Marc g
>
