Date: Wednesday, 14 March 2012

Time: 12:00 PM Eastern, 9:00 AM Pacific, 6:00 PM Zurich (contact SteveSpeicher if you'd like to participate)

Previous minutes: CmMeetings20120215

Agenda

Recurring agenda items:

• Recap of previous meeting CmMeetings20120215
• Community & Implementation updates
• Specification Issues Review CmSpecV2Issues

Main agenda items:

• W3C Community Groups update.
• CmStateTransitions follow-up

Assigned scenario owners:

• ITOpsToDev - VijayAggarwal, SteveSpeicher
• ScenariosMylyn - RobertElves
• CmScenariosMultiStateQuery - BrianSteele
• CmScenariosApplicationAnalysisTools - SteveSpeicher
• CmTaskTracking - AndreWeinand

Assigned specification owners

• attachments - SteveSpeicher, DaveSteinberg
• need for OR in query - BrianSteele
• state transition - SteveSpeicher, SamPadgett
• priority/severity - RobertElves, SteveSpeicher

Previous Action Items:

• VijayAggarwal to complete list of ITOpsToDev scenarios and prioritize
• SteveSpeicher - take feedback from Andre around implementation guidance wiki page, etc
• SteveSpeicher - 2010 / CM 2.0 Retrospective - review action items from last meeting
• SofiaYeung - State transitions between hierarchies of CRs - Sofia to draft some scenarios
• SofiaYeung - needs to do batch updating of CRs. This has been discussed off and on, and there are

Next meetings:

• April 11 - continue with 3.0 items

Minutes

Working Group and Community Updates

• VincentPhan? joining the CM workgroup from ClearQuest development.
• Kartik: W3C Community Groups Update - Pilot put on hold indefinitely due to legal obstacles. CM working group will remain on current infrastructure.
• SteveSpeicher: Looking at alternatives for link labels.
• SteveSpeicher: Should we revisit property mapping spreadsheet of various CM tools? Will discuss via email and queue for a future meeting.

State Transitions Review

• RobertElves added states of a task to ScenariosMylyn.
• Open Issue: Do we need to define qualifiers on some actions like resolve or mark duplicate?
• Open Issue: What to do with intermediate states on transitions.
• RobertElves: Are we only exposing standard actions or can providers expose additional actions in the resource?
• SteveSpeicher: Current intent is to expose a set of standard actions and allow providers to expose additional actions.
• SamPadgett: What resource do you get back when performing a GET on an action URI? An Action resource with a title, shape, and possibly other properties?
• VincentPhan? : For ClearQuest, it will be difficult to provide a shape since we don't know what the shape should look like until we begin the action.
• SamitMehta asked if we can add additional information to error responses about what fields failed validation on state transition errors.
• SamPadgett: Delegated approach as fallback when headless state transition fails?
• SamitMehta: We should understand from Robert and Sofia what limitations the delegated approach has for IDE scenarios.

Attendees: SamPadgett, SteveSpeicher, SofiaYeung, RobertElves, SamitMehta, VincentPhan? , BrianSteele, Kartik

Regrets: EricRoy, VijayAggarwal, DaveSteinberg, MichaelFiedler

-- SamPadgett - 29 Feb 2012