How will we determine the point where the use case and requirements subgroup
turns over its doc to the other groups? There are some who feel the use
case subgroup's job is done at some point once the other groups have begun
working. There are others who feel there is some kind of maintenance mode
that follows. Others still think it should stay active.
On a related note, I think at one point I suggested to the use case mailing
list that our issue resolution process might be valuable to the TC at large
after straw man 3 and/or the face to face. I want to make sure that I was
clear that my thought here was that Eve would take over the process at some
point - whenever the TC as a whole deemed the group's work to be 'ready' (my
first question, above) - as it could be effectively controlling the scope of
our work. I'd imagine that the issues that come up will be more and more
implemenation specific (as opposed to requirement-oriented) as well. I'd
imagine a continuum of issues coming up, really, gradually moving from
requirements to implementation details. So I thought that maybe if we had a
requirements issue resolution process with a little forward inertia, maybe
it would save us some time as we widen the audience.
I would appreciate your thoughts on these issues.
Principal Technical Evangelist
1 Embarcadero Center, Floor 5
San Francisco, CA 94111
tel - (415) 315-1529
fax - (415) 315-1545