Re: How to deal with spec-related issues
On Jul 19, 2006, at 9:31 AM, Raymond Feng wrote: Hi, When we implement Tuscany, once a while we run into issues/holes/ missing features in the SCA spec (SDO in some cases). I'm wondering if we have an open source endorsed process on how to deal with such issues. Because they may impact the programming model (the way how users use SCA or SDO), I think we should be extra cautious on making decisions. Here're a list of things I can see: 1) Capture the requirement (problem statement) 2) Make proposals (could be more than one, maybe with prototypes in sandbox?) 3) Reach consenus in the community by discussions 4) Present the proposal to the spec group 5) Conclude if it will be become an official spec feature (if accepted by the spec group) or a tuscany-specific extension (we should use tuscany namespace to model SCDL extensions if required) 5) Make changes in the code base with an agreed solution I suggest that we keep track of them on the Tuscany wiki site. What do you guys think? Sounds good. I did something like this for the CDI proposal - there is a page on the wiki at: http://wiki.apache.org/ws/Tuscany/SpecProposals -- Jeremy - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: How to deal with spec-related issues
Is the spec group pulling proposals from Tuscany wiki? If not, maybe we need to push the proposals to the spec group and we may need a process. On 7/19/06, Jeremy Boynes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On Jul 19, 2006, at 9:31 AM, Raymond Feng wrote: > Hi, > > When we implement Tuscany, once a while we run into issues/holes/ > missing features in the SCA spec (SDO in some cases). I'm wondering > if we have an open source endorsed process on how to deal with such > issues. Because they may impact the programming model (the way how > users use SCA or SDO), I think we should be extra cautious on > making decisions. > > Here're a list of things I can see: > > 1) Capture the requirement (problem statement) > 2) Make proposals (could be more than one, maybe with prototypes in > sandbox?) > 3) Reach consenus in the community by discussions > 4) Present the proposal to the spec group > 5) Conclude if it will be become an official spec feature (if > accepted by the spec group) or a tuscany-specific extension (we > should use tuscany namespace to model SCDL extensions if required) > 5) Make changes in the code base with an agreed solution > > I suggest that we keep track of them on the Tuscany wiki site. > > What do you guys think? Sounds good. I did something like this for the CDI proposal - there is a page on the wiki at: http://wiki.apache.org/ws/Tuscany/SpecProposals -- Jeremy - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Yang ZHONG
Re: How to deal with spec-related issues
On Jul 19, 2006, at 9:59 AM, Yang ZHONG wrote: Is the spec group pulling proposals from Tuscany wiki? If not, maybe we need to push the proposals to the spec group and we may need a process. There is precedent for that - for the CDI proposal I just sent a link to the wiki page to the spec mailing list. -- Jeremy - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: How to deal with spec-related issues
Right now Jeremy and I have been doing this as we are members of the spec group as well. However, there is no reason others can't do this as well. There will be a new OSOA website (mentioned by Raymond) where issues can be raised directly so this may facilitate that process. Jim On Jul 19, 2006, at 9:59 AM, Yang ZHONG wrote: Is the spec group pulling proposals from Tuscany wiki? If not, maybe we need to push the proposals to the spec group and we may need a process. On 7/19/06, Jeremy Boynes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On Jul 19, 2006, at 9:31 AM, Raymond Feng wrote: > Hi, > > When we implement Tuscany, once a while we run into issues/holes/ > missing features in the SCA spec (SDO in some cases). I'm wondering > if we have an open source endorsed process on how to deal with such > issues. Because they may impact the programming model (the way how > users use SCA or SDO), I think we should be extra cautious on > making decisions. > > Here're a list of things I can see: > > 1) Capture the requirement (problem statement) > 2) Make proposals (could be more than one, maybe with prototypes in > sandbox?) > 3) Reach consenus in the community by discussions > 4) Present the proposal to the spec group > 5) Conclude if it will be become an official spec feature (if > accepted by the spec group) or a tuscany-specific extension (we > should use tuscany namespace to model SCDL extensions if required) > 5) Make changes in the code base with an agreed solution > > I suggest that we keep track of them on the Tuscany wiki site. > > What do you guys think? Sounds good. I did something like this for the CDI proposal - there is a page on the wiki at: http://wiki.apache.org/ws/Tuscany/SpecProposals -- Jeremy - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Yang ZHONG - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: How to deal with spec-related issues
Hi... How do you get a membership at http://www.osoa.org. - Venkat On 7/19/06, Jim Marino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Right now Jeremy and I have been doing this as we are members of the spec group as well. However, there is no reason others can't do this as well. There will be a new OSOA website (mentioned by Raymond) where issues can be raised directly so this may facilitate that process. Jim On Jul 19, 2006, at 9:59 AM, Yang ZHONG wrote: > Is the spec group pulling proposals from Tuscany wiki? > If not, maybe we need to push the proposals to the spec group and > we may > need a process. > > > On 7/19/06, Jeremy Boynes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> On Jul 19, 2006, at 9:31 AM, Raymond Feng wrote: >> >> > Hi, >> > >> > When we implement Tuscany, once a while we run into issues/holes/ >> > missing features in the SCA spec (SDO in some cases). I'm wondering >> > if we have an open source endorsed process on how to deal with such >> > issues. Because they may impact the programming model (the way how >> > users use SCA or SDO), I think we should be extra cautious on >> > making decisions. >> > >> > Here're a list of things I can see: >> > >> > 1) Capture the requirement (problem statement) >> > 2) Make proposals (could be more than one, maybe with prototypes in >> > sandbox?) >> > 3) Reach consenus in the community by discussions >> > 4) Present the proposal to the spec group >> > 5) Conclude if it will be become an official spec feature (if >> > accepted by the spec group) or a tuscany-specific extension (we >> > should use tuscany namespace to model SCDL extensions if required) >> > 5) Make changes in the code base with an agreed solution >> > >> > I suggest that we keep track of them on the Tuscany wiki site. >> > >> > What do you guys think? >> >> Sounds good. >> >> I did something like this for the CDI proposal - there is a page on >> the wiki at: >> http://wiki.apache.org/ws/Tuscany/SpecProposals >> >> -- >> Jeremy >> >> >> >> - >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> >> > > > -- > > Yang ZHONG - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: How to deal with spec-related issues
The site is not quite public yet (probably next week). If you are interested, could you send me your contact information offline and I will facilitate looking into this? Also, are you currently employed by one of the collaborating companies? Jim On Jul 19, 2006, at 10:17 PM, Venkata Krishnan wrote: Hi... How do you get a membership at http://www.osoa.org. - Venkat On 7/19/06, Jim Marino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Right now Jeremy and I have been doing this as we are members of the spec group as well. However, there is no reason others can't do this as well. There will be a new OSOA website (mentioned by Raymond) where issues can be raised directly so this may facilitate that process. Jim On Jul 19, 2006, at 9:59 AM, Yang ZHONG wrote: > Is the spec group pulling proposals from Tuscany wiki? > If not, maybe we need to push the proposals to the spec group and > we may > need a process. > > > On 7/19/06, Jeremy Boynes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> On Jul 19, 2006, at 9:31 AM, Raymond Feng wrote: >> >> > Hi, >> > >> > When we implement Tuscany, once a while we run into issues/ holes/ >> > missing features in the SCA spec (SDO in some cases). I'm wondering >> > if we have an open source endorsed process on how to deal with such >> > issues. Because they may impact the programming model (the way how >> > users use SCA or SDO), I think we should be extra cautious on >> > making decisions. >> > >> > Here're a list of things I can see: >> > >> > 1) Capture the requirement (problem statement) >> > 2) Make proposals (could be more than one, maybe with prototypes in >> > sandbox?) >> > 3) Reach consenus in the community by discussions >> > 4) Present the proposal to the spec group >> > 5) Conclude if it will be become an official spec feature (if >> > accepted by the spec group) or a tuscany-specific extension (we >> > should use tuscany namespace to model SCDL extensions if required) >> > 5) Make changes in the code base with an agreed solution >> > >> > I suggest that we keep track of them on the Tuscany wiki site. >> > >> > What do you guys think? >> >> Sounds good. >> >> I did something like this for the CDI proposal - there is a page on >> the wiki at: >> http://wiki.apache.org/ws/Tuscany/SpecProposals >> >> -- >> Jeremy >> >> >> >> - >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> >> > > > -- > > Yang ZHONG - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
