Meeting minutes 2018-11-08

[Andrii Berezovskyi <andriib@kth.se>]

ian green: ian to scribe
Andrew Berezovskyi (KTH): https://github.com/oasis-tcs/oslc-core/wiki/!TC-work
Andrew Berezovskyi (KTH): https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/oslc-core/201811/msg00002.html
Martin Sarabura: Line termination directive... <<BR>>
ian green: Jim: suggest we copy and paste minutes into TC mailing list at the end of a meeting and so avoid the need to put them in the wiki or calendar.
ian green: minutes from 1 Nov 2018 10:01:25 -0500.  accepted
ian green: Jim: status on migration: SCM migration done (Andrew).
Andrew Berezovskyi (KTH): GH id: berezovskyi
ian green: Issues (Jim).  Needs Jira->github issues ID mapping to complete the migration tool. IDs needed for David, Martin, Nick, Andrew.
Jim Amsden: https://github.com/jamsden/testrepo
ian green: Wiki (Jim/Andrew): migrate content on an as-needed basis.  Is this acceptable?
ian green: The old wiki will remain for historical reference (like from the new wiki).
ian green: s/like/link/
ian green: Agreed to migrate only the content that is needed
ian green: Only way to update will be by pull requests.  Everyone who has push permissions will be able to merge into master
ian green: Jim: Update on query - ready for submission for public review?
ian green: David: all known work has been done by me.  Jim needs to check that he's reviewed that document.
ian green: David: Jim and Martin need to do a quality review.  Martin: it was fine.
ian green: Jim: will make a published version of the document, making it ready for csprd v1.  Jim: Martin and David to look at that version, then we can vote on submissionfor public review at the next meeting.
ian green: We will move this to github beforehand.
Andrew Berezovskyi (KTH): https://github.com/oasis-tcs/oslc-core
ian green: Jim: Need to republish core for updated cttee spec.  Needs a review to check this has been done.  Martin has reviewed the conformance clauses, and has made changes and believes these are done.
Andrew Berezovskyi (KTH): https://raw.githack.com/
ian green: This allows the html to be rendered in the browser.
Andrew Berezovskyi (KTH): https://raw.githack.com/oasis-tcs/oslc-core/master/specs/oslc-core-overview-v3.html
ian green: Andrew: updates from OSLCFest which recently finished.
ian green: Meeting was good, 50 attendees, 2 day event.  Videos are on fb.  Andrew will post link.
Andrew Berezovskyi (KTH): https://www.facebook.com/oslcfest/
ian green: Users and vendors.  Common perception of users is that IBM has too much control.  Yet, meeting had few IBMers
ian green: People complaining about dues to participate.
ian green: Can we encourage "observers".  But this is not permitted by OASIS.  Can we admit folks freely on calls.  Problem here is with IPR.
ian green: We can do the drafting on github, allowing individuals to contribute.  These would be required to sign CLA/legal documents etc.
ian green: Some users believe there are "not enough MUSTs".
ian green: How can we work this out?
ian green: Jim: we'd need to pin down and document the process.
ian green: Promoting the new website is one thing, but asking for contributions could be described for non-OASIS members.
ian green: Andrew: what contributions might we seek?
ian green: Jim: (1) statements of use.  (2) participation in public reviews. (some already closed, others forthcoming).  (3) join the TC
ian green: Andrew: enterprises say costs too high for TC membership.
ian green: David: lowest entry might be excluding smaller orgs.
ian green: Andrew: there is a lower tier ("independent person" - must not be an employee)
ian green: "Associate membership" - only 1 person in org, that deals with OASIS.
ian green: Andrew: but these are not suitable for users.  $2000 is too much.
ian green: Jim: need to be written up and proposed to Chet.  Allowing contributions without dues might be problematic.
ian green: Andrew will run this by the STC
Andrew Berezovskyi (KTH): https://www.oasis-open.org/policies-guidelines/open-projects-process
ian green: Other complaints: frustration that integrations from implementations do not solve the interoperability challenges. RM is an example.
ian green: Discovery and auth are examples from core
ian green: Should we standardize /rootservices?
ian green: David: only the parts in rootservices that are needed for core
ian green: Andrew: drop-in product replacement is not seamless.
ian green: MAYs/SHOULDs etc.  Profiles might be a way to address this
ian green: "Link Profile" - enough to create links.  "Full Profile" - CRUD of resource representations.
ian green: as examples
ian green: Users want a honest declaration of OSLC support
ian green: A profile might be like YES/NO on the conformance table
ian green: HArd for users to understand the impact on integration capability at this granularity.  Profile idea is coarser
ian green: Jim: Lessons learned from mof/uml/sysml have proven problematic
ian green: Profile sound appealing but fundamentally do not solve the problem, rather they move it elsewhere
ian green: OSLC conception was that the open marketplace would distil the common currency.  this hasn't happened
ian green: Andrew: look at existing products, determine an _existing_ partition
Andrew Berezovskyi (KTH):
 Showcase
Platform
Community
Tools
Governance

ian green: List of members: Andrew Berezovskyi (KTH), David Honey (Persistent/IBM), ian green, Jerry Stueve, Jim Amsden, Martin Sarabura
Martin Sarabura: I'll pick up the transcripts

--
/Andrew