[Dev] Re: Label field / domain model issues

[Bryan Stearns]

Katie Capps Parlante wrote:

> Ted has a list of stamping related bugs currently scheduled for 
> 0.7alpha3:
>
> https://bugzilla.osafoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2507 (unstamping 
> problems)
> 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:
>
>> Katie,
>>
>> 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.

...Bryan

>
> I'm proposing that we take on the stamping related work now, and 
> looking to push some other work out to make room.
>
> Cheers,
> Katie
>
>
>
> _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
>
> Open Source Applications Foundation "Dev" mailing list
> http://lists.osafoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/dev