← Prev in month
← Prev in thread
Next in thread →
Next in month →
Draft Minutes 2008-09-30 are attached
Title: SCA-Assy - 2008-10-30
Hide Chat
- DRAFT -
SCA-Assembly TC
Commandant's House, Charleston Navy Yard, Boston Massachusetts
30 OCT 2008 - 01 OCT 2008
Attendees
Present
Dale Moberg
Robert Freund
Eisaku Nishiyama
Eric Wells
Bryan Aupperle
David Booz
Mike Edwards
Simon Holdsworth
Dieter Koenig
Simon Nash
Jim Marino
Martin Chapman
Anish Karmarkar
Ashok Malhotra
Plamen Pavlov
Scott Vorthmann
Chairs
Mike Edwards
Martin Chapman
Scribes
Bob Freund
Anish Karmarkar
Agenda:Tuesday 30th September
09:00 - 09:30 Introduction & administrivia
09:30 - 10:30 Issue 37: Need to clarify contents of an SCA Domain virtual composite
10:30 - 10:45 Break
10:45 - 11:30 Issue 8: SCDL artifact resolution underspecified
11:30 - 12:00 Issue 16: Component URI is not well described
12:00 - 13:00 Lunch
13:00 - 13:30 Issue 36: Compatibility of Component Type side files
13:30 - 13:45 Issue 82: Relax schema to allow anywhere
13:45 - 14:00 Issue 32: SCA schema fixes requested for sca-core.xsd
14:00 - 14:30 Issue 5: Component type allows to specify wire targets on references
14:30 - 15:00 Issue 48: Defaulting composite reference targets to internal components
15:00 - 15:15 Break
15:15 - 15:30 Issue 51: Composite Completeness
15:30 - 15:45 Issue 73: What correlation support should SCA provide for callbacks?
15:45 - 16:15 Issue 64: Specification inconsistent on whether a default value for Property on a Constraining Type is allowed
or not
16:15 - 16:45 Issue 62: What is the default value for many and mustSupply on Properties?
16:45 - 17:15 Issue 61: Component type information directly in components
17:15 - 17:30 Issue 60: Description elements in SCDL
17:30 Finish
Agenda:Wednesday 1st October
09:00 - 10:00 Issue 33: Long-Running Request-Response Operations
10:00 - 10:30 Issue 77: How to map WSDL 1.1. portType to WSDL 2.0 interface and vice versa?
10:30 - 10:45 Break
10:45 - 11:15 Issue 44: Allow multiple definitions.xml files
11:30 - 12:00 Issue 34: Define error handling
12:00 - 12:30
12:00 - 13:00 Lunch
13:00 - 14:30 Compliance & Test Suite
14:30 - 14:45 Issue 58: Graphical representation of wires in included composites
14:45 - 15:00 Issue 55: Definition of Bindings
15:00 - 15:15 Break
15:15 - 15:30 Issue 54: interface.partnerLinkType
15:30 - 16:00 Issue 52: @ImplementationRef on Service or Reference to identify appropriate parts of the implementation
16:00 - 17:00 Issue 70: Deployment, Redeployment - Granularity and Semantics
Issue 76: SCA Assembly Specification should provide a lifecycle model for Components and related artifacts in the
Domain
Issue 46: Dynamic Aspects of the Domain not adequately described in the Assembly Specification
17:00 - 17:30 Work Plan for Specification - towards CD02
17:30 - 18:00 Leave open for follow-up & conclusion
Contents
Topics
[1]
Opening
[2]
Issue 37: Need to clarify contents of an SCA Domain virtual composite
[3]
Issue 8: SCDL artifact resolution underspecified
[4]
Issue 16: Component URI is not well described
[5]
Issue 36: Compatibility of Component Type side files
[6]
Issue 82: Relax schema to allow anywhere
[7]
Issue 32: SCA schema fixes requested for sca-core.xsd
[8]
Issue 5: Component type allows to specify wire targets on references
[9]
Issue 48: Defaulting composite reference targets to internal components
[10]
Issue 60: Description elements in SCDL
[11]
Issue 33: Long-Running Request-Response Operations
[12]
Issue 77: How to map WSDL 1.1. portType to WSDL 2.0 interface and vice versa?
[13]
Issue 44: Allow multiple definitions.xml files
[14]
Compliance & Test Suite
[15]
Conformance Points
[16]
Issue 58: Graphical representation of wires in included composites
[17]
Issue 55: Definition of Bindings
[18]
Issue 54: interface.partnerLinkType
[19]
Issue 52: @ImplementationRef on Service or Reference to identify appropriate parts of the implementation
[20]
Issues 70, 76, and 46 relating to Lifecycles
[21]
issue 62
[22]
next steps
[23]
Fixing the time and location for the next face to face
[24]
AOB
Table of Resolutions
Table of Action Items
Action Items
New:
id=2008-10-30-1 status=pending Vorthmann to examine the specification and create text that implements the directional resolution to Assembly-37
id=2008-10-30-2 status=pending Edwards to write up some specific text consistent with the directional resolution to Assembly-16
id=2008-10-30-3 status=pending Karmaker to develop concrete text consistent with the directional resolution to Assembly-36
id=2008-10-30-4 status=pending Editors to fix pseudoschemas a/r to be consistent with the resolution that resolves Assembly-32
id=2008-10-30-5 status=pending Vorthman to create a proposal relative to potential solution for issue 5
id=2008-10-30-6 status=pending Koenig do the detailed work to implement the resolution to Assembly-60
id=2008-10-30-7 status=pending Edwards to make a version of the spec and will label normative statements and will produce an example test case
id=2008-10-30-8 status=pending Freund to draft a conformance statement
Resolutions
2008-10-30-1: Minutes of 2008-09-23 approved w/o
2008-10-30-2: Resolve that the direction for the resolution of Assembly-37 shall be "SCA does not define a meaning for composite level properties,
services and references in deployment composites, since the domain composite cannot be used as the implementation of another
component. A deployment composite must always be a valid composite per all the rules defined in the SCA specs. w/o
2008-10-30-3: m:Edwards s:Freund resolve Assembly-8 with the motion above w/o
2008-10-30-4: m:Karmarkar s:Vorthmann the direction for Assembly-16 is adopted without aliases, fragment identification mechanism as written
by Anish to used for things below component level. The structureURIs are relative URIs with the base URI being the domain
URI w/o
2008-10-30-5: m:Vorthmann s:Aupperle accept Anish's text above as a direction for the resolution to Assembly-36
2008-10-30-6: m:Moberg s:Vorthmann Close Assembly-82 with no action w/o
2008-10-30-7: Resolve Assembly-32 by the following: service, reference, ComponentService and ComponentReference in sca-core.xsd to remove
the 1st choice, remove the <any> in choice and change the cardinality of sca:binding to 0..unbounded w/o
2008-10-30-8: m:Anish s:Moberg Motion to defer indefinitely w/o
2008-10-30-9: (as amended) Resolve Assembly-60 with the motion above
2008-10-30-10: m:Karmarker s:Booz Resolve Assembly-77 with the second proposal contained in its Jira entry w/o
2008-10-30-11: m:Freund s:Malhotra Resolve Assembly-44 with the proposal in the Jira on a 5 to 4 vote
2008-10-30-12: m:Malhotra s:Wells Resolve Assembly-58 by closing with no action w/o
2008-10-30-13: m:Vorthmann s:Booz Resolve Assembly-55 by closing with no action w/o
2008-10-30-14: m:Karmarkar s:Freund Resolve Assembly-54 to close with no action and to communicate to BPEL TC that Assembly is not interested
in including this functionality on an 8 to 3 vote with one abstention
2008-10-30-15: m:Edwards s:Karmarkar CNA issue 76 w/o
2008-10-30-16: m:Booz s:Karmarkar CNA issue 70 w/o
2008-10-30-17: m:Edwards s:Nash resolve issue 62 with proposal at http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/sca-assembly/200809/msg00052.html + "remove the mustSupply attribute from the property element of contrainingType (line 2267 in CD01-Rev2)"
Minutes
Scribe: Bob Freund
Opening
<bob (Hitachi)>
Roll - 12 of 26 voting members, two short of quorum at the opening of the meeting
Roll - Now 13 of 26
Now quorate
Agenda - accepted
Resolution: Minutes of 2008-09-23 approved w/o
Issue 37: Need to clarify contents of an SCA Domain virtual composite
The protagonists face off across the ring...
<Martin C>
http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/sca-assembly/email/archives/200809/msg00078.html
Nash discuses his email at http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/sca-assembly/email/archives/200809/msg00078.html
<Scott Vorthmann>
proposal: change original text of Dave's proposal in the jira, which is:
<Scott Vorthmann>
Composite level properties, services and references from
deployment composites are not deployed into the virtual SCA Domain composite.
<Scott Vorthmann>
change that to :
<Scott Vorthmann>
Composite level properties, services and references from deployment composites are not relevant in the domain composite, since it cannot be used as the implementation of another component
<Jim Marino>
Bob, when you get a chance, can you please add me as present?
Motion: m:Vorthmann s: Booz resolve issue 37 with "Composite level properties, services and references from deployment composites are not relevant in the domain composite, since it cannot be used as the implementation of another component"
Amendment: m:Karmarkar s:Vorthmann direction for resolution of issue 37: "Composite level properties, services and references from deployment composites are not relevant in the domain composite, since it cannot be used as the implementation of another component"
<Simon Nash>
SCA does not define a meaning for composite level properties, services and references in deployment composites, since the
domain composite cannot be used as the implementation of another component"
amendment passes w/o
Amendment: (substitution) m:Nash s:Malhotra Resolve the direction for the resolution of Assembly-37 as "SCA does not define a meaning
for composite level properties, services and references in deployment composites, since the domain composite cannot be used
as the implementation of another component"
amendment by substitution passes w/o
Amendment: m:Karmarkar s:Nash append to the exiting motion -- A deployment composite must always be a valid composite per all the rules
defined in the SCA specs
amendment passes w/o
Motion: (recitative) Resolve the direction for the resolution of Assembly-37 as "SCA does not define a meaning for composite level
properties, services and references in deployment composites, since the domain composite cannot be used as the implementation
of another component. A deployment composite must always be a valid composite per all the rules defined in the SCA specs.
Resolution: Resolve that the direction for the resolution of Assembly-37 shall be "SCA does not define a meaning for composite level properties,
services and references in deployment composites, since the domain composite cannot be used as the implementation of another
component. A deployment composite must always be a valid composite per all the rules defined in the SCA specs. w/o
Action: Vorthmann to examine the specification and create text that implements the directional resolution to Assembly-37
<Mike Edwards>
Next item:
Issue 8: SCDL artifact resolution underspecified
<Mike Edwards>
http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/sca-assembly/200809/msg00076.html
Chapman assumes chair
Edwards leads the discussion
<Martin C>
http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/sca-assembly/email/archives/200809/bin00000.bin
<Martin C>
http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/sca-assembly/email/archives/200809/msg00000.html
<Dieter Koenig>
replace "wsdlLocation" by "location" (for the @location of wsdl:import, see http://www.w3.org/TR/wsdl#_document-n)
<Dieter Koenig>
bpel:import has an @importType in order to specify whether WSDL or XSD is imported, see http://docs.oasis-open.org/wsbpel/2.0/CS01/wsbpel-v2.0-CS01.html#_Toc151784207
<Dieter Koenig>
replace previous (backlevel) BPEL link by http://docs.oasis-open.org/wsbpel/2.0/OS/wsbpel-v2.0-OS.html#_Toc164738483
Motion: m:Edwards s: Freund Accept Issue8-Proposal-v6-sca-assembly-1.1-spec-Cd01.doc as the resolution of Issue 8 with the following
changes:
Add after line 3111:
The SCA runtime must raise an error if an artifact cannot be resolved using these mechanism, if present.
Add on line 3104:
Note: This form of artifact resolution does not apply to imports of composite files, as described in Section 6.6
Replace end of line 3141/3142:
"must be searched in lexical order"
Replace 2nd sentence lline 3146/3147:
The first location as defined by lexical order is chosen. If no locations are specified no order exists and the one chosen
is implementation dependent.
Add a diagram of the example after line 3168.
NB the PDF of the document is the normative text
at http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/sca-assembly/email/archives/200809/bin00000.bin
Resolution: m:Edwards s:Freund resolve Assembly-8 with the motion above w/o
Issue 16: Component URI is not well described
<Mike Edwards>
http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/sca-assembly/200809/msg00053.html
<Mike Edwards>
proposal is in that email
<anish>
wsdl frag id: http://www.w3.org/TR/2007/REC-wsdl20-20070626/#frag-ids
<anish>
service -> #service(name-of-the-service)
<anish>
reference -> #reference(name-of-the-reference)
<anish>
binding ->#binding(name-of-the-service/name-of-the-binding)
<anish>
ref binding -> #ref-binding(name-of-the-ref/name-of-the-binding)
<anish>
service binding -> #service-binding(name-of-the-service/name-of-the-binding)
Motion: m:Karmarkar s:Vorthmann the direction for Assembly-16 is adopted without aliases, fragment identification mechanism as written
by Anish to used for things below component level. The structureURIs are relative URI with the base URI being the domain URI
<Scott Vorthmann>
sample to consider :
<Scott Vorthmann>
c1/c2/c3#service(foo) could be replaced with "c1/c2/c3/service(foo)", which is really just a shorthand for "component(c1)/component(c2)/component(c3)/service(foo)"
Resolution: m:Karmarkar s:Vorthmann the direction for Assembly-16 is adopted without aliases, fragment identification mechanism as written
by Anish to used for things below component level. The structureURIs are relative URIs with the base URI being the domain
URI w/o
Action: Edwards to write up some specific text consistent with the directional resolution to Assembly-16
Issue 36: Compatibility of Component Type side files
<Mike Edwards>
http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/sca-assembly/200809/msg00057.html
<Dave Booz>
for the record, here's what the assembly spec says now (cd01 rev1) on this:
<Dave Booz>
172 The component type is calculated in two steps where the second step adds to the information
173 found in the first step. Step one is introspecting the implementation (if possible), including the
174 inspection of implementation annotations (if available). Step two covers the cases where
175 introspection of the implementation is not possible or where it does not provide complete
176 information and it involves looking for an SCA component type file. Component type
177 information found in the component type file must be compatible with the equivalent information
178 found from inspection of the implementation. The component type file can specify partial179 information, with the remainder being derived from the implementation.
<Simon Nash>
are we taking people from the queue or should people just jump in when they want to say something?
<Dave Booz>
Mike E is trying to get you in
<anish>
Each C&I specifies (1) if a CT side file(s) is allowed (2) if introspection is allowed, (3) name and location of side files(s)
(4) compatibility between introspected CT and side file(s), (5) how the effective CT of an implementation is derived. SCA
Assembly only cares about the effective CT.
<anish>
Each implementation has an (effective) CT, specified by sca:ComponentType, how that is arrived at depends on the implementation
type.
Resolution: m:Vorthmann s:Aupperle accept Anish's text above as a direction for the resolution to Assembly-36
<Mike Edwards>
13:30 - 13:45 Issue 82: Relax schema to allow anywhere
Action: Karmaker to develop concrete text consistent with the directional resolution to Assembly-36
Issue 82: Relax schema to allow anywhere
Resolution: m:Moberg s:Vorthmann Close Assembly-82 with no action w/o
<Simon Nash>
is there a motion?
<Simon Nash>
ok just saw that
<Mike Edwards>
ok with that?
<Simon Nash>
i did not see motion in the chat room before the vote happened
<Mike Edwards>
Issue 82 is closed with no action
<Simon Nash>
maybe I was the one out of sync...
Issue 32: SCA schema fixes requested for sca-core.xsd
Dale discusses his issue
<anish>
<sequence>
<element ref="sca:interface" minOccurs="0" maxOccurs="1" />
<element name="operation" type="sca:Operation" minOccurs="0"
maxOccurs="unbounded" />
<choice minOccurs="0" maxOccurs="unbounded">
<element ref="sca:binding" />
<any namespace="##other" processContents="lax"
minOccurs="0" maxOccurs="unbounded" />
</choice>
<element ref="sca:callback" minOccurs="0" maxOccurs="1" />
<any namespace="##other" processContents="lax" minOccurs="0"
maxOccurs="unbounded" /> </sequence>
<anish>
change it to:
<anish>
<sequence>
<element ref="sca:interface" minOccurs="0" maxOccurs="1" />
<element name="operation" type="sca:Operation" minOccurs="0"
maxOccurs="unbounded" />
<element ref="sca:binding" minOccurs="0" maxOccurs="unbounded"/>
<element ref="sca:callback" minOccurs="0" maxOccurs="1" />
<any namespace="##other" processContents="lax" minOccurs="0"
maxOccurs="unbounded" /> </sequence>
<anish>
for reference change it to:
<anish>
<complexType name="Reference">
<sequence>
<element ref="sca:interface" minOccurs="0" maxOccurs="1" />
<element name="operation" type="sca:Operation" minOccurs="0"
maxOccurs="unbounded" />
<element ref="sca:binding" minOccurs="0" maxOccurs="unbounded"/>
<element ref="sca:callback" minOccurs="0" maxOccurs="1" />
<any namespace="##other" processContents="lax" minOccurs="0"
maxOccurs="unbounded" />
</sequence>...
<anish>
same fix (remove choice and change cardinality of sca:binding to 0..unbounded) for ComponentService and ComponentReference
type decl
Motion: m:Karmarkar s:Vorthmann Resolve Assembly-32 by the following: service, reference, ComponentService and ComponentReference
in sca-core.xsd to remove the 1st choice, remove the <any> in choice and change the cardinality of sca:binding to 0..unbounded
Resolution: Resolve Assembly-32 by the following: service, reference, ComponentService and ComponentReference in sca-core.xsd to remove
the 1st choice, remove the <any> in choice and change the cardinality of sca:binding to 0..unbounded w/o
Action: Editors to fix pseudoschemas a/r to be consistent with the resolution that resolves Assembly-32
Issue 5: Component type allows to specify wire targets on references
Edwards describes Henning's issue
Action: Vorthman to create a proposal relative to potential solution for issue 5
Issue 48: Defaulting composite reference targets to internal components
<Dave Booz>
from cd01 rev1:
<Dave Booz>
861 Where a component reference is promoted by a composite reference, the promotion MUST be
862 treated from a multiplicity perspective as providing 0 or more target services for the component
863 reference, depending upon the further configuration of the composite reference. These target
864 services are in addition to any target services identified on the component reference itself, subject865 to the rules relating to multiplicity described in this section.
<Simon Nash>
please ignore the above
<Simon Nash>
These target services are in addition to any target services identified on the component reference itself, unless the rules
relating to multiplicity described in this section preclude additional services, in which case these target services are overrides.
<Simon Nash>
getting closer, modulo typos
Motion: m:Nash s:Karmarkar Resolve Assembly48 replace lines 863 through 865 in cd01 rev1 with "These target services are in addition
to any target services identified on the component reference itself, unless the rules relating to multiplicity described in
this section preclude additional services, in which case these target services are overrides."
From Robrt's "Likewise, motions are out of order if they conflict with a motion that has been adopted by the society and has
been neither rescinded, nor reconsidered and rejected after adoption. Such conflicting motions, if adopted, are null and void
unless adopted by the vote required to rescind or amend the motion previously adopted."
<EricW>
Does the resolution of ASSEMBLY-41 help in any way with the @replace attribute?
<EricW>
As in:
<EricW>
http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/sca-assembly/200808/msg00019.html
Vorthman Calls the question
The motion of the Previous Question fails
Motion: m:Anish s:Moberg Motion to defer indefinitely
Resolution: m:Anish s:Moberg Motion to defer indefinitely w/o
Issue 60: Description elements in SCDL
Motion: m:Malhotra s:Karmarkar Resolve Assembly-60 by accepting the proposal in the Jira
<Dieter Koenig>
issue 60 - proposed xml schema enhancement
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<xsd:schema xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema" elementFormDefault="qualified" attributeFormDefault="unqualified">
<!-- extension base for all SCA complex types -->
<xsd:complexType name="DocumentationBase">
<xsd:sequence>
<xsd:element ref="documentation" minOccurs="0" maxOccurs="unbounded"/>
</xsd:sequence>
</xsd:complexType>
<xsd:element name="documentation" type="Documentation"/>
<xsd:complexType name="Documentation" mixed="true">
<xsd:sequence>
<xsd:any namespace="##other" processContents="lax" minOccurs="0" maxOccurs="unbounded"/>
</xsd:sequence>
<xsd:attribute ref="xml:lang"/>
<xsd:anyAttribute namespace="##other" processContents="lax" />
</xsd:complexType>
<!-- example usage -->
<xsd:element name="foo" type="anyScaType"/>
<xsd:complexType name="anyScaType">
<xsd:complexContent>
<xsd:extension base="DocumentationBase">
<xsd:sequence>
<xsd:element name="someElement" type="xsd:string"/>
</xsd:sequence>
<xsd:attribute name="someAttribute" type="xsd:string"/>
</xsd:extension>
</xsd:complexContent>
</xsd:complexType>
</xsd:schema>
Amendment: m:Koenig s:Karmarker add schema above to the previous motion
amendment passes w/o
Resolution: (as amended) Resolve Assembly-60 with the motion above
Action: Koenig do the detailed work to implement the resolution to Assembly-60
Issue 33: Long-Running Request-Response Operations
Koenig reviews his presentation attached to http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/sca-assembly/200809/msg00063.html
Issue 77: How to map WSDL 1.1. portType to WSDL 2.0 interface and vice versa?
It is our understanding that this topic has been discussed in the Java Bindings TC, the Assembly TC having deferred discussion
for three weeks to allow its consideration, however as of this time minutes of the Java Bindings TC in which we think it was
discused have not been posted
Motion: m:Karmarker s:Booz Resolve Assembly-77 with the second proposal contained in its Jira entry
Resolution: m:Karmarker s:Booz Resolve Assembly-77 with the second proposal contained in its Jira entry w/o
Issue 44: Allow multiple definitions.xml files
Edwards channels Rowley
Motion: m:Freund s:Malhotra Resolve Assembly-44 with the proposal in the Jira
Resolution: m:Freund s:Malhotra Resolve Assembly-44 with the proposal in the Jira on a 5 to 4 vote
<anish>
http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/download.php/29536/SCA%20Bindings%20minutes%202008-09-25.doc
Compliance & Test Suite
The room clears out...
Separate issues a) Comformance points and b) Testing
Conformance Points
Edwards:
Some things are easily defined in xsd, others are not so easy to define
Action: Edwards to make a version of the spec and will label normative statements and will produce an example test case
Action: Freund to draft a conformance statement
Issue 58: Graphical representation of wires in included composites
Motion: m:Malhotra s:Wells Resolve Assembly-58 by closing with no action
Resolution: m:Malhotra s:Wells Resolve Assembly-58 by closing with no action w/o
Issue 55: Definition of Bindings
Motion: m:Vorthmann s:Booz Resolve Assembly-55 by closing with no action
Resolution: m:Vorthmann s:Booz Resolve Assembly-55 by closing with no action w/o
Issue 54: interface.partnerLinkType
<Mike Edwards>
http://www.osoa.org/jira/browse/ASSEMBLY-54
<Dieter Koenig>
WS-BPEL 2.0 partner link types are defined here: http://docs.oasis-open.org/wsbpel/2.0/OS/wsbpel-v2.0-OS.html#_Toc164738487
Motion: m:Karmarkar s:Freund Resolve Assembly-54 to close with no action and to communicate to BPEL TC that Assembly is not interested
in including this functionality
Resolution: m:Karmarkar s:Freund Resolve Assembly-54 to close with no action and to communicate to BPEL TC that Assembly is not interested
in including this functionality on an 8 to 3 vote with one abstention
Issue 52: @ImplementationRef on Service or Reference to identify appropriate parts of the implementation
Assembly-52 has been closed on 2008-06-03 with no action as recorded in the minutes of that date
Issues 70, 76, and 46 relating to Lifecycles
<Mike Edwards>
Issue 70: Deployment, Redeployment - Granularity and Semantics
Issue 76: SCA Assembly Specification should provide a lifecycle model for Components and related artifacts in the
Domain Issue 46: Dynamic Aspects of the Domain not adequately described in the Assembly Specification
Scribe: Anish Karmarkar
discussion on lifecycle, stages and dynamicity
Booz:
can we separate the lifecycle ideas from the versioning problem?
Karmarkar:
don't try to solve the versioning problem
Chapman:
if you undeploy and deply another one, there isn't a problem
Edwards:
for bpel, you may not want to have the undeployed version go away
martin & scott: not much we can say here
Edwards:
if undeploy action necessarily stops things, we cannot update dynamically
Booz:
why would we want it to we restrictive
Edwards:
one option is to say that for new 'instances' things get updated dynamically. old instances don't
Karmarkar:
not sure what we can say in assembly. C&Is can do whatever they want
Aupperle:
if one C&I says certain things are possible and another says something else. How will the runtime support different things?
Edwards:
it is even worse, different runtimes for the same runtime may do different things
Vorthmann:
that is a portability argument, bryan's Q is about implementability
ashok:
let's have a proposal and then we can discuss
Booz:
policy describes roles. we could do similar. instead of defining stages/state diagram we could just define roles.
Motion: m:Edwards s:Karmarkar CNA issue 76
Vorthmann:
seems to be that all three issues could be closed with guidance to the C&I TCs
no objection to the motion
Resolution: m:Edwards s:Karmarkar CNA issue 76 w/o
Motion: m:Booz s:Karmarkar CNA issue 70
no objection to the motion
Resolution: m:Booz s:Karmarkar CNA issue 70 w/o
issue 62
<Mike Edwards>
http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/sca-assembly/200809/msg00052.html
<Mike Edwards>
+ "remove the mustSupply attribute from the property element of contrainingType (line 2267 in CD01-Rev2)"
Motion: m:Edwards s:Nash resolve issue 62 with proposal at http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/sca-assembly/200809/msg00052.html + "remove the mustSupply attribute from the property element of contrainingType (line 2267 in CD01-Rev2)"
no objection to the motion
Resolution: m:Edwards s:Nash resolve issue 62 with proposal at http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/sca-assembly/200809/msg00052.html + "remove the mustSupply attribute from the property element of contrainingType (line 2267 in CD01-Rev2)"
TC thanks Bob and Hitachi for the wonderful facilities for f2f and the dinner and cruise
next steps
Chapman:
rfc 2119 stuff
Edwards:
cd02 and section 3 (example)
Chapman:
need a f2f for rfc 2119 for the whole TC or a subset
Folks interested in rewriting the spec with 2119 language: Martin, Mike, Eric
the testing and 2119 calls with happen every other week
2119 spec rewrite will use the testing subcommittee ML etc
Scribe: Bob Freund
Fixing the time and location for the next face to face
Target time is January, week of the 26th tentatively
A message will go to the list suggesting this time and requesting offers to host.
AOB
having no other business, the meeting is adjourned at 05:29
[End of Minutes]
Formatted on 2008-10-12 at 15:44:41 GMT-5
Minutes formatted by Schreiber, a collection of XSLT
stylesheets by Bob Freund modeled after David Booth's scribe
Schreiber diagnostics output[Delete this section before publishing the minutes]
statistics: Schreiber found 241 input lines
edits: Schreiber found the following text-edit commands:
edits: Line 11: s/Tuesday/Agenda: Tuesday
edits: Line 50: s/amendment:/amendment: m:Karmarkar s:Vorthmann
edits: Line 55: s/:/: m:Karmarkar s:Nash
edits: Line 62: s/Issue/Topic: Issue
edits: Line 75: s/Issue/Topic: Issue
edits: Line 84: s/bining/binding/
edits: Line 91: s/Issue/Topic: Issue
edits: Line 100: s/Aupperly/Aupperle/
edits: Line 101: s/motion/resolution
edits: Line 114: x/13:30
edits: Line 126: s/Issue/Topic: Issue
edits: Line 130: s/Issue/Topic: Issue
edits: Line 135: x/These target
edits: Line 138: s/whcih cases/which case
edits: Line 142: s/865/865 in cd01 rev1
edits: Line 143: s/Nash/Nash s:Karmarkar
edits: Line 149: s/witht/with/
edits: Line 151: s/"replace/@replace
edits: Line 156: s/Issue/Topic: Issue
edits: Line 170: s/Issue/Topic: Issue
edits: Line 175: s/Issue/Topic: Issue
edits: Line 178: s/Ashok/Malhotra
edits: Line 185: s/Com/Topic: Com
edits: Line 191: s/Some/Edwards: Some
edits: Line 196: s/Issue/Topic: Issue
edits: Line 200: s/Issue/Topic: Issue
edits: Line 204: s/Issue/Topic: Issue
edits: Line 210: s/Issue/Topic: Issue
edits: Line 214: i/70/Topic: Issues 70, 76, and 46 relating to Lifecycles
edits: Line 218: s/can/can we/
edits: Line 224: s/can/cannot/
edits: Line 226: s/be/we/
command-chair: Line 3: Since the line number is less than or equal to 20 we will interpret this as a chairname command, note
that the chair command is deprecated
command-chair: Line 5: Since the line number is less than or equal to 20 we will interpret this as a chairname command, note
that the chair command is deprecated
command-scribe: Line 6: Bob Freund is recognized
command-scribe: Line 6: Bob Freund's nick bob has been selected
edit-substitute: command on line 11 succeeded, changed line 9 from 'Tuesday' to 'Agenda: Tuesday'
edit-delete: Line 11 was deleted
edit-substitute: command on line 50 succeeded, changed line 48 from 'amendment:' to 'amendment: m:Karmarkar s:Vorthmann'
edit-delete: Line 50 was deleted
edit-substitute: command on line 55 succeeded, changed line 54 from ':' to ': m:Karmarkar s:Nash'
edit-delete: Line 55 was deleted
edit-substitute: command on line 62 succeeded, changed line 61 from 'Issue' to 'Topic: Issue'
edit-delete: Line 62 was deleted
edit-substitute: command on line 75 succeeded, changed line 74 from 'Issue' to 'Topic: Issue'
edit-delete: Line 75 was deleted
edit-substitute: command on line 84 succeeded, changed line 83 from 'bining' to 'binding'
edit-delete: Line 84 was deleted
edit-substitute: command on line 91 succeeded, changed line 90 from 'Issue' to 'Topic: Issue'
edit-delete: Line 91 was deleted
edit-substitute: command on line 100 succeeded, changed line 99 from 'Aupperly' to 'Aupperle'
edit-substitute: command on line 101 succeeded, changed line 99 from 'motion' to 'resolution'
edit-delete: Line 100 was deleted
edit-delete: Line 101 was deleted
edit-delete: Line 112 was deleted
edit-delete: Line 114 was deleted
edit-substitute: command on line 126 succeeded, changed line 125 from 'Issue' to 'Topic: Issue'
edit-delete: Line 126 was deleted
edit-substitute: command on line 130 succeeded, changed line 129 from 'Issue' to 'Topic: Issue'
edit-delete: Line 130 was deleted
edit-delete: Line 133 was deleted
edit-delete: Line 135 was deleted
edit-substitute: command on line 138 succeeded, changed line 136 from 'whcih cases' to 'which case'
edit-delete: Line 138 was deleted
edit-substitute: command on line 142 succeeded, changed line 141 from '865' to '865 in cd01 rev1'
edit-substitute: command on line 143 succeeded, changed line 141 from 'Nash' to 'Nash s:Karmarkar'
edit-delete: Line 142 was deleted
edit-delete: Line 143 was deleted
edit-substitute: command on line 149 succeeded, changed line 146 from 'witht' to 'with'
edit-substitute: command on line 151 succeeded, changed line 146 from '"replace' to '@replace'
edit-delete: Line 149 was deleted
edit-delete: Line 151 was deleted
edit-substitute: command on line 156 succeeded, changed line 155 from 'Issue' to 'Topic: Issue'
edit-delete: Line 156 was deleted
edit-substitute: command on line 170 succeeded, changed line 169 from 'Issue' to 'Topic: Issue'
edit-delete: Line 170 was deleted
edit-substitute: command on line 175 succeeded, changed line 174 from 'Issue' to 'Topic: Issue'
edit-delete: Line 175 was deleted
edit-substitute: command on line 178 succeeded, changed line 177 from 'Ashok' to 'Malhotra'
edit-delete: Line 178 was deleted
edit-substitute: command on line 185 succeeded, changed line 184 from 'Com' to 'Topic: Com'
edit-delete: Line 185 was deleted
edit-substitute: command on line 191 succeeded, changed line 190 from 'Some' to 'Edwards: Some'
edit-delete: Line 191 was deleted
edit-substitute: command on line 196 succeeded, changed line 195 from 'Issue' to 'Topic: Issue'
edit-delete: Line 196 was deleted
edit-substitute: command on line 200 succeeded, changed line 199 from 'Issue' to 'Topic: Issue'
edit-delete: Line 200 was deleted
edit-substitute: command on line 204 succeeded, changed line 203 from 'Issue' to 'Topic: Issue'
edit-delete: Line 204 was deleted
edit-substitute: command on line 210 succeeded, changed line 209 from 'Issue' to 'Topic: Issue'
edit-delete: Line 210 was deleted
edit-insert: i/ command line 211.1 inserted before source line
edit-delete: Line 214 was deleted
command-scribe: Line 215: Anish Karmarkar is recognized
command-scribe: Line 215: Anish Karmarkar's nick anish has been selected
edit-substitute: command on line 218 succeeded, changed line 217 from 'can' to 'can we'
edit-delete: Line 218 was deleted
citation-detection-scribed: Line 222: Check for possible unrecognized nick 'martin & scott'
edit-substitute: command on line 224 succeeded, changed line 223 from 'can' to 'cannot'
edit-delete: Line 224 was deleted
edit-substitute: command on line 226 succeeded, changed line 225 from 'be' to 'we'
edit-delete: Line 226 was deleted
citation-detection-scribed: Line 252: Check for possible unrecognized nick 'Folks interested in rewriting the spec with 2119
language'
command-scribe: Line 255: Bob Freund is recognized
command-scribe: Line 255: Bob Freund's nick bob has been selected
citation-detection-scribed: Line 260: Check for possible unrecognized nick 'having no other business, the meeting is adjourned
at 05'
system: Transformer: SAXON 9.0.0.6
[End of Schreiber diagnostic output]
← Prev in month
← Prev in thread
Next in thread →
Next in month →