opencsa-liaison — archive

[Anish Karmarkar]

anish: Scribe: anish anish: Agenda: 1. Roll Call 2. Scribe Assignment 3. Agenda Bashing 4. Approval of minutes of 10/16/2008 conf-call http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/opencsa-liaison/200810/msg00010.html 5. Issues 6. OpenCSA Project Management Review of testing plans Version Control System recommendation status/update Any other blocker issues? 7. Next conf-call? 8. AOB Topic: Respository anish: Mike: Few things to talk about: one of them is version control system anish: SVN seems to be consensus anish: OASIS is working on it anish: Jeff: when do we need this by? anish: Mike: we just started going. another couple of weeks before we have any artifacts. Doable if we get something by end of november anish: Dave: definitely need it by end of year. Hard to say if we'll absolutely need it before TG anish: Dave: be willing to be guinea pigs if OASIS wants to provide us something anish: Will need an SVN by begining of december Topic: Approval of minutes anish: Mike moves to approve minutes of 10/16/2008 located at http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/opencsa-liaison/200810/msg00010.html. Dave Seconds anish: no objections. Minutes are approved anish: Topic: status reports anish: Assembly - 9 open issues left. 2 new ones being created anish: ... Have a complete pass of 2119 statements and test tags anish: ... out for review anish: Policy - 9 or 10 issues open. Resolution text in new draft, need approval. Just behind Assembly. On track anish: Java - quite behind. f2f coming up, so hope to make some progress during that time. 50 new issues. F2F has 3 new days. anish: ... a lot of those issues are from spec review and are minor anish: ... The chairs will have a better feel for where things are after the f2f anish: BPEL - 2 new issues open. One new issue filed. Editors have provided a draft for RFC 2119 and is currently under review. anish: Bindings - 17 open issues and 3 new one opened today. New contribution for binding.http. If that is accepted then there will be more issues, but unclear whether such a new binding would be on the same schedule anish: C/C++ - Bryan not on the call Topic: Schedule and exit criteria anish: Jeff: how are we doing on the schedule? anish: Dave: i think we're behind anish: Jeff: do we need more data? anish: Dave: after the java f2f might be a good time to talk about schedule again anish: MikeE: we also need 2 impls for every spec. We haven't asked the Q of where those implementations would come from anish: Jeff: consider that to be part of testing group anish: MikeE: tuscany may be able to do that but depends on how we cut the cloth and how rigorous we want to be anish: Anish: do we need two implementations for all features or only mandatory features anish: Jeff: we need to two impls. for all the features anish: ... otherwise you have really said anything anish: s/have/haven't/ anish: MikeE: all impls should pass the test suite, but don't think we'll have a test suite to test every feature anish: Dave: does OASIS have any guidance wrt this? anish: Jeff: we have to define it anish: Jeff: have to convince two-thirds of the SC anish: Mike: problem is resources anish: Dave: what if the test committee test only the mandatory aspects of the spec? anish: Jeff: will have to think about it. That should be the minimum bar anish: Jeff: we don't want this to be an invitation for someone to profile it anish: Jeff: also a Q of Committee spec v. OASIS standard anish: ... for example, we may approve CS with minimum bar and require more for OS anish: Dave: any time issues between CS and OS anish: Jeff: no maximum, minimum is 7 days anish: Jeff: the idea was that OS is more mature anish: Jeff: we could do a staged roll out anish: ... throwing out ideas anish: MikeE: we should aim to pass the giggle test, avoid profiles by creating a test that contains a lot of features. But writing a test for every feature would be hard anish: Martin: could just lay out the mandatory part anish: MikeE: not sure we can create tests for *all* mandatory parts anish: Jeff: this needs more thought anish: Dave: need to think about subsetting idea more anish: Jeff: we can spend a lot of time discussing in abstract, but we need to starting doing things and get an idea of what the gap is anish: MikeE: wrt Java, there are lot of things, say with threading, that will result in lot of tests anish: Dave: yes, we could potentially write 100s of tests for Java anish: Jeff: like the idea of including a SCDL that has all the features, so implementations have to atleast support all the syntactic parts anish: Jeff: this conversation will have to continue anish: Topic: next meeting anish: Mike: ok having a meeting next week, but not the week after (java f2f) anish: Jeff: won't be available next week, but sanjay may be anish: Jeff: any point in having a call till after the java f2f? anish: Dave: unless there is something about SVN, not much to talk about anish: Jeff: next call on 20th nov, unless something comes up about SVN anish: Meeting adjourned