This wiki is locked. Future workgroup activity and specification development must take place at
our new wiki
. For more information, see
this blog post about the new governance model
and
this post about changes to the website
.
TWiki
>
Main Web
>
AutomationHome
>
AutomationMeetings
>
AutomationMeetings20120209
(10 Feb 2012,
MichaelFiedler
)
(raw view)
Time: *1:00PM Eastern US* (contact MichaelFiedler if you'd like to participate) The Automation meetings alternate times each meeting to accommodate the global team. ---++ Agenda * Reoccurring agenda items: * Recap of previous meeting AutomationMeetings20120126 * Update on action items * LucasPanjer provided more details for the [[AutomationScenariosMylyn#Use_Case_2_Trigger_Execution_of][Mylyn build request scenario]] . * Followup on need for automation instructions in automation plan to satisfy scenarios (PaulMcMahan, CharlesRankin, PramodChandoria). * Investigate use of instance resource shape to type parameter definitons (MichaelFiedler) * See AutoParmDefProposal * Main agenda items: * Specification Version Number * Draft Spec discussion: AutoSpecificationV1 * Discussion of updates based on comments received so far * [[AutoSpecificationV1#Compliance][Compliance table]] * [[AutoSpecificationV1#Automation_Service_Provider_HTTP][HTTP method table]] * [[AutoSpecificationV1#Delegated_UIs][Delegated UI table]] * [[AutoSpecificationV1Issues][Open issues]] discussion * General comments on the spec * Next meetings: * 16 February ---++ Minutes Attending: Michael Fiedler, John Arwe, Paul McMahan, Lucas Panjer, Pramod Chandoria, Vaibhav Srivastava, Charles Rankin, Max Vohlken * LucasPanjer talked through the Mylyn "Build Request" scenario * Need to construct UI in Eclipse via SWT - not likely to use delegated UI * Feels the new parameter definition proposal meets the scenario requirements * Primary discussion was around the new [[AutoParmDefProposal][parameter definition] proposal * General agreement that oslc:Property is a good fit * Some concerns that it adds complexity for service providers and consumers beyond exposing simple name/value pairs * Additional concern on Resource Shape of the Automation Plan. TODO: Create sample resource shape and make sure there are no recursion issues * Concerns around extensibility * Service providers can extend as they see fit - use their own namespace for new attributes and expose them in shape documents * Concerns around parameter dependencies * Example: At first level user selects Windows, second level they select XP * Service provider logic or delegated UIs needed in V1 to handle these types of dependencies. * TODO: Update draft specification to adopt this proposal * Version number of the specification * Core guidance is to number the spec after the Core spec it is based on. Automation would be V2 under this guidance * Several workgroup members felt this was confusing and might cause problems if Automation needed a new specification before the next Core spec - i.e. need "dot" releases * TODO: MichaelFiedler will send an e-mail to the workgroup list to solicit opinions. Next meeting: 16 February at 10AM Eastern US Time
E
dit
|
A
ttach
|
P
rint version
|
H
istory
: r4
<
r3
<
r2
<
r1
|
B
acklinks
|
V
iew topic
|
Ra
w
edit
|
M
ore topic actions
Topic revision: r4 - 10 Feb 2012 - 16:35:24 -
MichaelFiedler
Main
Main Web
Create New Topic
Index
Search
Changes
Notifications
RSS Feed
Statistics
Preferences
Webs
Main
Sandbox
TWiki
Български
Cesky
Dansk
Deutsch
English
Español
Français
Italiano
日本語
Nederlands
Polski
Português
Русский
Svenska
简体中文
簡體中文
Copyright � by the contributing authors. All material on this collaboration platform is the property of the contributing authors.
Contributions are governed by our
Terms of Use
Ideas, requests, problems regarding this site?
Send feedback