List of actions from OSLCRM meetings

Community activities

[CLOSED] Getting covenants in place for V1 (they are here: RmSpecificationCovenantV1). Missing covenants (BrendaEllis, TorgeKummerow, RenRenganathan).

[CLOSED] Broaden workgroup participation

• IanGreen to investigate tigris.org and report back by 8th Feb.
  • findings can be found here
• TorgeKummerow to investigate eclipse project incubator on RM and report back by 8th Feb.
  • Unforutnately it seems quite dead for some time. No one
    responded to my tries to establish contact. The maillinglists and
    newsgroups are dry. Latest entries from the participants are from
    februar last year. Seems like the leaders ran into some personal troubles.
  • However I got the interest of the Frauenhofer institute. They want to participate in this group.

[OPEN] BrendEllis? expressed concern that many hard integration challenges might be falling between the gaps - for example, RainerE suggested an extension of his baselining requirements scenario (S1) in which the baseline contains a heterogeneous collection of things - requirements, models, test cases etc. How would this be supported by OSLC? ScottBosworth to schedule follow-up with BrendaEllis, IanGreen, DavidJohnston? , and himself.

[CLOSED] DavidRuiz: Working on Ravenflow covenant.

[CLOSED] RainerE: Ian to ping on covenant.

Scenario efforts

Important dates for scenario work:

• 8th February - scenarios ready for discussion and review with the workgroup. The workgroup will assess the scenarios and take some forward into specification.
• 22nd February - scenario work closed, moving into specification phase.

Scenario elaborations underway:

• [CLOSED] Traceability (SimonWills; BrendaEllis and TorgeKummerow to contribute specific scenarios)
  • Simon and Torge have contributed traceability scenarios here: RmTraceabilityScenarios.
  • Simon and Jeremy to elaboratate Traceability Scenarios see RmTraceabilityScenarioToCapabilityMapping.
• [OPEN] Baselining (RainerE to elaborate on Siemen's baselining scenario)
• [CLOSED] Reporting - Desire to ensure that reporting scenarios being explored by the Reporting workgroup account for RM-like reporting needs. IanGreen to ask TackTong to present OSLC Reporting approach.
• [OPEN] PLM scenarios. BrendaEllis to write up PLM scenario - this would connect with OSLC workgroup in this area (currently being considered by OSLC steering group).
• [OPEN] RM/AM scenarios. BrendaEllis to write up modelling scenarios.

Specification efforts

• [OPEN] IanGreen to bring forward 1.0 backlog specification needs.
• [OPEN] Produce DRAFT V2 specification that is aligned with the OSLC Core specification. Initial effort underway at RmSpecificationV2. See RmSpecificationNeedsV2 for the plan on how the V2.0 specification effort will proceed.
• [OPEN] Define link types that support current and planned integration scenarios (IanGreen, SimonWills, JimConallen). SimonWills produced RmDiscussionLinkTypes during 2009 and will be the basis of the effort. This effort should be aware of the OSLC Core approach to defining such link types. (SteveSpeicher has defined a set of link types from the perspective of OSLC CM V2.0.)

[CLOSED] IanGreen: bug in the common service description document (wrong namespace name)

[OPEN] Finalization of 1.0 IanGreen: move MNs media-type to 2.0 or beyond. This item due to be closed during adoption of OSLC Core. (OSLC Core does not permit non-standard media-types.)

[CLOSED] IanGreen: Clarify SteveSpeicher's comments on Required on Write etc. (== PUT and/or POST etc). Done - updated the spec. with clarification.

[CLOSED] IanGreen: Take forward reporting, allocate owner. Reckoned to be properly part of the Reporting effort.