[Dev] Re: Label field / domain model issues
stearns at osafoundation.org
Mon Mar 13 14:00:42 PST 2006
Katie Capps Parlante wrote:
> Ted has a list of stamping related bugs currently scheduled for
> https://bugzilla.osafoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2507 (unstamping
> https://bugzilla.osafoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3735 (stamping
> event as task resets alarm to none)
> https://bugzilla.osafoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2117 (third party
> parcels can foul up stamping)
> Given that we are expecting to use stamping in 0.7alpha2, I'm
> suggesting that we go ahead and work on stamping now, possibly
> prioritizing some of the other domain model work later.
> Bryan Stearns wrote:
>> I'm not sure what you're asking, but:
> I'm asking you if you need the labeling work done in 0.7alpha2. If we
> can put this off until 0.7alpha3, it gives us more flexibility with
> the schedule. Just trying to make dependencies clear.
Aha - I hadn't intended to do labeling work in alpha2 (I'm focusing on
general bugs and the event-notification stuff).
>> - I think the "consensus" plan (on Philippe's notes from the meeting
>> where I aired my stamping concerns,
>> http://wiki.osafoundation.org/bin/view/Projects/InviteEngineering) is
>> implementable: sending an event notification (an event+email item)
>> again to new people by resetting all the email attributes is
>> certainly doable.
> Agreed that this is doable. I also want to make sure that Ted has time
> on his schedule if there is any supporting domain model work that
> needs to be done.
>> - However, I don't see how we get from there to something that
>> maintains the state of previous communications around an event; I
>> don't understand how versioning will work, when it's supposed to be
>> done, or how it will appear in the UI.
> Yup, I understand that you are concerned about this and want to tackle
> it. The next step is to talk about this at the design session tomorrow.
>> - I'm not sure what the "stamping bugs" are - after I saw the mention
>> in the phasing proposal, I asked Sheila about them and she didn't
>> know what specific bugs they were either.
Thanks (and thank you Ted, too!) for the list of bugs - I was concerned
that there were bugs that weren't in Bugzilla related to stamping, so
I'm relieved they're there.
> In addition to the stamping bugs listed above, we've been tossing
> around the idea of implementing stamping as annotations. This has
> implications for both the sharing format and for the "dump and reload"
> (née schema evolution) implementation.
As I understand annotations, they'll help with one stamping problem
(attribute-name collision), but not with the other issues I was
concerned about (relating to communication around events over time). I'm
looking forward to tomorrow's discussion.
> I'm proposing that we take on the stamping related work now, and
> looking to push some other work out to make room.
> _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
> Open Source Applications Foundation "Dev" mailing list
More information about the chandler-dev