[Oslc-Automation] Re-visiting Automation Result contributions

[Michael F Fiedler]

An issue was queued up for discussion during the last workgroup meeting and
we will talk about it on Thursday in the next meeting.

The definition of an Automation Request [1] contribution has deliberately
been left as vague\flexible (depending on viewpoint) so far.   There is
sentiment in the workgroup that we need to take a second look at
contributions now that some of the other issues have been tackled.   To
prepare for this week's workgroup meeting, think about how the contribution
concept applies to the three major scenarios we've covered (Build, Test,
Deploy) and if the current definitions are enough to accomplish the
scenario.   I'd also ask that folks looking at the spec from a consumer
standpoint (Mylyn, Hudson, etc) think about what is needed in the result
contributions to make them useable.

Some possible topics:

- determining the type of a contribution (logfile, binary, test result)
- determining the quality of a contribution
- what examples should we develop to illustrate/give guidance on usage

[1] -
http://open-services.net/bin/view/Main/AutoSpecificationV1#Resource_AutomationResult


Regards,
Mike