Hi,
I accept this proposal.
Cheers,
Matthew
Dave Morris wrote:
> Matthew Graham wrote:
>
>> 13. WSDL vs spec: I worry that we seem to be attempting to define
>> VOSpace from both whereas really the WSDL should just present an XML
>> description of what the spec says.
>
>
> Yep, good point.
> In order to help keep track of any changes we want to make, I would
> like to suggest the following :
>
> 1) Any changes to the specification are done with reference to the
> document not the WSDL.
> 2) For each change, we send a change request email to the mailing
> list, detailing exactly what we need to change in the document and why.
> 3) Everyone gets a chance to accept or reject the change (within a
> reasonable time limit).
> 4) If the change is accepted, we update the document, and then modify
> the WSDL to match.
>
> I seem to remember some of the Apache projects had a similar system,
> where all of the developers on the project mailing list had a +1
> (accept) -1 (reject) or 0 (don't care) vote.
> I don't want to overload us with too much process, but Matthew is
> right, discussion should be based on the document and not the WSDL.
> If the specification is wrong, we change it in the document first.
>
> Having reached a general agreement for the v0.21 document in Canada,
> we need to keep the number and scope of the changes as small as possible.
> Requiring an explicit change request for each modification means we
> have to be very specific about exactly what we want to change.
>
> Having said that, if we find parts of the specification are difficult
> to represent clearly in the WSDL, then this is a perfectly valid
> reason for going back to the document and refactoring things.
>
> Hope this helps,
> Dave
>
> ps.
> To start things off, can you all send a +1, 0 or -1 for this.
>
Received on 2006-06-15Z21:25:27