Mid-range Computing Use case modified
I have uploaded the "Mid-range Computing" usecase document with revisions to address comments. Summarized as follows: * Comments from Morris Riedel - Comments embedded in the original -- I tried to address these as they popped up in the document - PGI section could be filled in with more detailed "requirements" that are not covered by BES, JSDL, etc. -- I'm not really sure what you mean here. That section says that those specs cover what PGI needs, so there are no additional requirements not covered by them. I can't really list requirements not covered by BES and JSDL without knowing details of PGI that I don't have * Comments from Etienne - The template is BAD -- The template is the exact one that we as a group decided on (more than once) to adopt. Comment is therefor irrelevant and unhelpful. * Oxana - Does not address necessity of common interfaces and standards -- No part of the use case requires those things, why should the use case have them? - Too generic -- Possibly, however, changing it to be less generic would significantly change the use case itself making it a new use case and so I left it as it is. if it is unacceptable in its current state, then that is OK, but otherwise it is what it is.
Integrated too - also thanks for this one Mark!
-- -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- -- Von: pgi-wg-bounces@ogf.org [mailto:pgi-wg-bounces@ogf.org] Im Auftrag von Mark Morgan -- Gesendet: Freitag, 3. September 2010 19:39 -- An: pgi-wg@ogf.org -- Betreff: [Pgi-wg] Mid-range Computing Use case modified -- -- I have uploaded the "Mid-range Computing" usecase document with -- revisions to address comments. Summarized as follows: -- -- * Comments from Morris Riedel -- - Comments embedded in the original -- -- I tried to address these as they popped up in the document -- - PGI section could be filled in with more detailed "requirements" -- that are not covered by BES, JSDL, etc. -- -- I'm not really sure what you mean here. That section says that -- those specs cover what PGI needs, so there are no additional -- requirements not covered by them. I can't really list requirements -- not covered by BES and JSDL without knowing details of PGI that I -- don't have -- -- * Comments from Etienne -- - The template is BAD -- -- The template is the exact one that we as a group decided on (more -- than once) to adopt. Comment is therefor irrelevant and unhelpful. -- -- * Oxana -- - Does not address necessity of common interfaces and standards -- -- No part of the use case requires those things, why should the use -- case have them? -- - Too generic -- -- Possibly, however, changing it to be less generic would -- significantly change the use case itself making it a new use case and -- so I left it as it is. if it is unacceptable in its current state, -- then that is OK, but otherwise it is what it is. -- _______________________________________________ -- Pgi-wg mailing list -- Pgi-wg@ogf.org -- http://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/pgi-wg
participants (2)
-
Mark Morgan -
Morris Riedel