[oslc-cm] Providing additional types of "change request"-like resources

[Steve K Speicher]

Thanks Paul,

Some responses inlined...

Paul McMahan/Raleigh/IBM wrote on 02/08/2013 01:29:47 PM:

> From: Paul McMahan/Raleigh/IBM
> To: Steve K Speicher/Raleigh/IBM at IBMUS
> Cc: oslc-cm at open-services.net
> Date: 02/08/2013 02:00 PM
> Subject: Re: [oslc-cm] Providing additional types of "change 
request"-like resources
> 
> QualityManagementTask is a change request for creating or updating a 
test 
> artifact, often in response to a change in some other artifact such as a 

> requirement or plan item.   QualityManagementTasks are also used to 
track 
> the setup and preparation of test environments.  This often involves 
> procurement and installation of hardware/software, creating data pools, 
> creating virtualized services, provisioning test images in the cloud, 
etc. 
> Think of QualityManagementTask as a ChangeRequest of special interest to 

> quality management processes.   Much like the RequirementsChangeRequest 
> mentioned in your proposal could be seen as a ChangeRequest of special 
> interest to requirements management processes.
> 

Perhaps we can look at a couple of other questions here:

1. What scenarios need to look at the type of resource to know it is 
specifically a QMTask to do things differently?

2. What additional properties would a QMTask have from a generic Task?

> ReviewTask is a request to review or approve an artifact, typically 
> resulting in its status being changed to 'reviewed', 'approved', 
'rejected',
> etc.   The review process/workflow can often span across multiple OSLC 
> domains.   For example the review process for a test artifact can also 
> involve the review process for the requirements or plan items linked to 
it. 
> Think of ReviewTask as a ChangeRequest that helps track the people and 
> processes involved in preparing a lifecycle artifact for use.
> 

We do have a number of scenarios that call our for a "Review" type of 
resource.  Perhaps we (speaking with my CM hat on) can define what we need 
and socialize it to more (Core, RM, QM, etc) who may have a need for this 
review.  Also, approvals are a close cousin of review....do you see this 
as well?

> Maybe including the "Task" suffix in the names of these proposed new 
> subtypes is misleading, since I agree it leaves you with an impression 
that 
> they are just specializations of Task.   But I think that these subtypes 
are
> at least as distinct as the other proposed subtypes (Defect, PlanItem, 
> RequirementChangeRequest).   So maybe different names would help - 
> QualityManagementChangeRequest and ReviewRequest ?
> 
> Best wishes,
> Paul McMahan
> IBM Rational 
> 
> From: Steve K Speicher/Raleigh/IBM
> To: Paul McMahan/Raleigh/IBM at IBMUS
> Cc: oslc-cm at open-services.net
> Date: 02/07/2013 01:30 PM
> Subject: Re: [oslc-cm] Providing additional types of "change 
request"-like resources
> 
> Paul,
> 
> Could you provide a bit more detail (scenario) of why these specific 
types 
> of resources are needed and a simple "Task" is not enough?
> 
> Thanks,
> Steve Speicher
> IBM Rational Software
> OSLC - Lifecycle integration inspired by the web -> 
http://open-services.net
> 
> Paul McMahan/Raleigh/IBM wrote on 11/29/2012 02:14:57 PM:
> 
> > From: Paul McMahan/Raleigh/IBM
> > To: Steve K Speicher/Raleigh/IBM at IBMUS, 
> > Cc: oslc-cm at open-services.net, "Oslc-Cm" 
<oslc-cm-bounces at open-services.net>
> > Date: 11/29/2012 02:15 PM
> > Subject: Re: [oslc-cm] Providing additional types of "change 
request"-likeresources
> > 
> > +1,  I would also like to suggest QualityManagementTask and ReviewTask 
as well.
> > 
> > Best wishes,
> > Paul McMahan
> > IBM Rational 
> > 
> > "Oslc-Cm" <oslc-cm-bounces at open-services.net> wrote on 11/29/2012 
01:48:16 PM:
> > 
> > > From: Steve K Speicher/Raleigh/IBM at IBMUS
> > > To: oslc-cm at open-services.net
> > > Date: 11/29/2012 01:48 PM
> > > Subject: [oslc-cm] Providing additional types of "change request"-
> > > like resources
> > > Sent by: "Oslc-Cm" <oslc-cm-bounces at open-services.net>
> > > 
> > > Currently, the CM 2.0 defines only 1 rdf:type of resource and we all 
know 
> > > and love that as oslc_cm:ChangeRequest.
> > > 
> > > There are many other "kinds" of change requests, today we help guide 
some 
> > > scenarios that are looking for these kinds of resources by using 
> > > oslc:usage with some known values [1],[2].
> > > 
> > > Not having these usage identifiers be rdf:types has always been a 
little 
> > > odd, for a number of reasons:
> > > - Typical way of querying and inferring the type of resource relied 
on 
> > > non-standard ways
> > > - Associating dialogs, factories, queries without these type is a 
bit off.
> > > 
> > > We've already proven the need for these usage/type things.  So the 
names 
> > > (ids) and concepts are still valid.
> > > 
> > > My proposal: 
> > >         In 3.0, introduce these as additional subtypes 
(rdfs:subClassOf 
> > > oslc_cm:ChangeRequest) as first class OSLC-CM resource types: 
Defect, 
> > > PlanItem, Task, RequirementsChangeRequest. 
> > > 
> > > [1] - 
> > > http://open-services.net/pipermail/oslc-cm_open-services.net/2010-
> > > June/000172.html
> > > [2] - 
> > > 
http://open-services.net/bin/view/Main/CmSpecificationV2#Usage_Identifiers
> > > 
> > > Thanks,
> > > Steve Speicher
> > > IBM Rational Software
> > > OSLC - Lifecycle integration inspired by the web -> 
> > > http://open-services.net
> > > 
> > > 
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Oslc-Cm mailing list
> > > Oslc-Cm at open-services.net
> > > http://open-services.net/mailman/listinfo/oslc-cm_open-services.net
> > >