User Tools

Site Tools


15_april_2010

Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

Link to this comparison view

15_april_2010 [2010/04/15 20:09] (current)
admin created
Line 1: Line 1:
 +[[start|Back to Start]] | 
 +[[Teleconference Notes|Back to Teleconference Notes]]
 +
 +===== 15 April 2010 =====
 +
 +Quick notes from the 15th April teleconference:​
 +
 +**On the call**:
 +
 +   * Pete Rivett
 +   * Jishnu Mukerji
 +   * Jim Rice
 +   * Bob Daniel
 +   * Manfred Koethe
 +   * Larry Johnson
 +   * Cory Casanave
 +   * Sridhar Iyengar
 +   * J D Baker
 +   * Tom Rutt
 +   * Doug Tolbert
 +
 +Jishnu chairs
 +Andrew takes notes
 +
 +Three things to do (from emailed strawman agenda)
 +
 +1. Agree on Terms of Reference of the group. This could include but no be
 +limited to consideration of:
 +a. Develop guidelines for machine readable files that must accompany
 +submissions
 +b. Minimal set without which submissions and F/RTF reports will not be
 +considered complete enough for consideration at the meeting.
 +c. Assistance that can /needs to be provided in the way of tooling and best
 +practices
 +d. Any additional items
 +e. Resulting changes in SMSC processes for acceptance of documents and
 +publishing of documents.
 +
 +2. Decide on timeline and deadline for reporting results to the AB with
 +specific proposals for adoption as AB Policy.
 +
 +3. Assuming that atleast the first 3 items in (1) are included in the ToR
 +as described above. Discuss and scope out each items and appoint one or
 +more individuals to lead specific aspects. Make as much progress as
 +possible on the call and create action items to be completed by the
 +followup call to drive further activity in those calls.
 +
 +What to add? Bob adds - how to bring existing spec into scope of new
 +submission?
 +
 +Sridhar - For instance, when you re-used BMM concepts?
 +
 +Bob - We did 2 things - Subtyping in MPG from BMM, and some new associations.
 +
 +Larry - Would like guidelines for reusing specifications and list of common
 +ways of reusing.
 +
 +Pete - Need to have discussion on policy. MPG created new XSD for existing
 +BMM spec using proprietary algorithms.
 +
 +Jishnu - Let's add this to list - Is a spec designed to be reused? If so,
 +policy on what reuse is allowed, what not allowed?
 +
 +Sridhar - guidelines. 2 ways models created. ​ ???, and  part of mof models.
 +
 +Pete - In the general case, the question is about submission of new PSMs
 +for existing PIMs - e.g. MPG PSM for BMM PIM.
 +
 +Cory - Relationship between XMI, XSD, RDF. In BMM we have XSDs, XMI for
 +same specifications. Multiple representations of same model, how
 +correlated, namespaces, repositories,​ etc?
 +
 +Pete - What is governance of resulting PSM? By group that created it, or
 +PIM owners (e.g. BMM)?
 +
 +Jisnhu - Not sure we can take a fixed position on this.
 +
 +Pete - Then decision should be discussed and documented on per-submission
 +basis.
 +
 +Sridhar - If RTF for original spec exists, presumably have to refer to them.
 +
 +Jishnu - CORBA integration was a mess. No governance process. General issue
 +- managing lifecycle of specifications.
 +
 +Jishnu - It's only recently that we're explicitly started documenting
 +dependencies. We should require dependency info in submission. This is
 +fifth item on the list - governance of evolution of specifications.
 +
 +Bob - There are 2 parts; the conceptual, and nuts and bolts. Lots of nuts
 +and bolts issues on tooling.
 +
 +Jishnu - Let's talk timelines and availability. Can we target Cambridge MA
 +September meeting, with face-to-face discussions at the MN meeting and con
 +calls beforehand.
 +
 +Pete - wants to do it quicker.
 +
 +Jishnu - OK, we'll aim to complete in June, fall back to September if we
 +don't make it. We need leads on each of 5 items. I'll take lead on SMSC
 +process (item 1e).
 +
 +Cory - will lead on item 1a.
 +
 +Larry - Can review.
 +
 +Jisnhu - Can pete lead on the new item? He's already proposed draft policy.
 +
 +Pete - was going to volunteer on item 1a.
 +
 +Jishnu - OK, so you work with Cory.
 +
 +Sridhar - will lead on new item instead.
 +
 +Jishnu - takes 1b.
 +
 +New item is: "When multiple specs are related to each other and have
 +dependencies,​ how would their evolution be governed?"​
 +
 +Sridhar leads on this new item.
 +
 +JD leads on item 1c. Bob supports.
 +
 +SMSC wiki can be used to document, and SMSC mailing list for discussion.
 +
 +Pete - guidelines. If (say) RFP asks for UML model, what files should be
 +submitted? List acceptable files for each artefact. item 1c lists how files
 +are produced (tooling).
 +
 +Jishnu - on next call, focus on item 1a. On call after that, spend mostly
 +on item 1c, which flows from that. I'll keep track of 1b & 1e.
 +
 +Sridhar'​s item - more weighty in terms of scope and impact.
 +
 +Schedule - weekly calls, starting on Thr 29th April at 6pm BST (1pm EDT).
 +
 +**Next Call Info: **
 +
 +Date/Time: Thursday 29th April 2010 18:00 BST, 13:00 EDT, 10:00 PDT
 +
 +Number: +1 605 475 4850
 +
 +Access code: 422074#
 +
 +In case of problems getting onto the call, please call Andrew on +44 7710 469624.
 +
  
15_april_2010.txt ยท Last modified: 2010/04/15 20:09 by admin