Quoting [Gary Mazz] (Apr 14 2010):
Hi,
Just as a quick update, Andy and I both have pressing commitments this week. We will meet on updating the document next week.
Hi Gary, Thats great to know! :-) FWIW, I did not want to give the impression that we want to pressure OCCI to move faster - the pace should be determined by the group, not GFSG... Thanks for the update, Andre.
-gary
Thijs Metsch wrote:
Hi Andre & Group,
We'll use the tracker from the google code project for this. I'll submit the comments in there...Basic plan is that Andy and Gary work on most of the comments regarding the XHTML5 doc. Whereas Sam and I will probably deal with the comments regarding the Core document. But as usual everybody willing to help is more then welcome! This process will be started asap :-)
Cheers,
-Thijs
On Wed, 14 Apr 2010 12:26:57 +0200, Andre Merzky <andre@merzky.net> wrote:
Dear OCCI group,
please note that all 4 OCCI documents
- Open Cloud Computing Interface - Core and Models - Open Cloud Computing Interface - HTTP Header Rendering - Open Cloud Computing Interface - Infrastructure Models - Open Cloud Computing Interface - XHTML5 rendering
have now officially left the public comment period. The next step is for the group, and the document authors, to review the comments received, and to thus redact the documents. You can also decide *not* to follow some suggestion made in the comments, of course, but in that case, please provide a (short) justification, either on this list, with Cc to the comment author if he is not on the list, or in the comment trackers(*).
There is no specific deadline associated with the groups reaction to public comment, but it is obviously in the groups best interest to keep turnaround times short.
I want to remind you that major changes to the documents may imply another round of public comments. The group can either request that to happen, or GFSG can impose that to happen, depending on document changes and level of group consensus. In any case, please ensure that the finally committed documents represent 'rough consensus'.
It would be very helpful for the next GFSG and OGF Editor review if any form of change tracking could be used to highlight the differences between the originally submitted documents, and the final versions to be prepared. I personally think that a simple diff would be fine, which should be trivial to obtain from your mercury repository, but any other, more elaborate changelog may also be helpful.
FWIW, GFSG assigned me as the Area Director to guide you through the document process, so, if you have any procedural questions, please don't hesitate to contact me.
Best wishes, Andre.
(*) The trackers have now been moved to the archived comments section at http://www.ogf.org/gf/docs/?archived
-- Nothing is ever easy.