Geoff, there is a "specification" category for Jiras so when you raise one you can select SDO C++ and specification. Prefixing the summary field is a good idea.. maybe [SDO C++ 2.1 Spec] as the specification classification covers Java/C++ and sdo/sca.
Actually I'm not sure if the specification category is for changes we, Tuscany, want to see in the specs... Just raise them against SDO C++ with the [SDO C++ 2.1 Spec] summary prefix Cheers, On 17/10/06, Geoffrey Winn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I am working through the draft 2.1 version of the SDO for Java spec, migrating the changes into the C++ spec. That will create requirements to change the SDO implementation to comply with the new spec. My preference is to raise JIRAs for these items, with those JIRAs clearly labelled so that we can distinguish them from all the rest should we need to. My suggestion is that we do that in the summary field so that the JIRAs would include say "[ 2.1 spec]" at the beginning of the summary field. Anyone have any better ideas? Regards, Geoff.
-- Pete
