On Tue, Apr 1, 2008 at 1:39 PM, Simon Nash <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> TUSCANY-2164 describes an issue that has been resolved in OASIS > as ASSEMBLY-27. The current implementation is correct according to > the OSOA 1.0 specs, but there are good reasons to change it to > align with the OASIS resolution of this issue. This raises the > general question of how Tuscany should handle differences between > the OSOA and OASIS specs. > > Changes made by OASIS can fall into the following categories: > 1. Fixing clear errors in the spec. > 2. Clarfication of ambiguities or inconsistencies. > 3. Minor improvements. > 4. Major changes. > > For categories 1 and 2, Tuscany is incorporating these on an > ongoing basis. For category 4, I'd suggest that we hold off on > these for now until the OASIS work gets further along. For > category 3, I think we should look at these changes on a > case by case basis and decide whether to incorporate them. > > For all categories, I think it would be useful to maintain a > Wiki page that lists the OASIS issue resolutions that are currently > incorporated in the Tuscany SCA Java implementation. > > For OASIS issue ASSEMBLY-27 (TUSCANY-2164), I think the OASIS change > is an improvement and we should implement it in Tuscany. > > What do others think about any or all of the above? > > Simon > Sounds reasonable to me, we're not saying Tuscany is fixed on the 1.0 spec level so it seems fine to incorporate updates and fixes. Do we really need the distinction between cat 3 and 4? Even for the major changes we could evaluate them on a case by case basis, maybe some we'd want to do anyway if they're particular useful. ...ant
