See also: IRC log
<trackbot> Date: 13 April 2010
<scribe> scribe: Mark
Minutes from 30/03 were approved
Minutes from 6/04 were approved
Eric: Also need to discuss testing items - after Item 8 on agenda
Agenda approved with no other amendments
Eric: No progress on 146
Mark: No progress on 148 and 154
Phil: Completed 155 and 157
close action-155
<trackbot> ACTION-155 Check that we have coverage of all non-WSDL assertions if we do not run the WSDL tests closed
close action-157
<trackbot> ACTION-157 Propose an alternate proposal to resolve issue 30 closed
Still pushing Oracle for reply
Issue 29 still raised - awaiting action 148
<eric> Issue 30 - existing proposal: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-soap-jms/2010Apr/0002.html
Phil: Proposed alternative
resolution
... See:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-soap-jms/2010Apr/0006.html
Mark: wording is slightly different - can we make it consistent e.g. "then port" should be "then other properties set on the endpoint"
Eric: Agreed - we will revisit this issue when Phil has revised this proposal
http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/soapjms/tracker/issues/31
Eric's revised proposal: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-soap-jms/2010Mar/0024.html
RESOLUTION: ALL approve the updated proposal
<padams> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-soap-jms/2010Apr/0008.html
Phil's link above is the revised proposal for issue 30
No objections to revised proposal
RESOLUTION: ALL approve Phil's changes
Issue 32 - http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/soapjms/tracker/issues/32
http://www.w3.org/2010/04/06-soap-jms-minutes.html
RESOLUTION: No objections to the proposed resolution to issue 32
Issue 33 : http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/soapjms/tracker/issues/33
http://www.w3.org/2010/04/06-soap-jms-minutes.html
RESOLUTION: All approve the proposed resolution to issue 33
<scribe> ACTION: Phil to apply the resolutions to issue 30, 31, 32, and 33 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/04/13-soap-jms-minutes.html#action01]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-159 - Apply the resolutions to issue 30, 31, 32, and 33 [on Phil Adams - due 2010-04-20].
Resolution for Issue 22:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-soap-jms/2010Jan/0026.html
All approve the application of the resolution for Issue 22
RESOLUTION: Issue 22 can be closed
Issue 28: http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/soapjms/tracker/issues/28
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-soap-jms/2010Mar/0025.html
Discussion on whether topicReplyToName is allow in the JNDI variant
<eric> http://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-merrick-jms-uri-06.txt
Section 2.2.2 of binding spec confirms it is not valid for the jndi variant
All approve the application of the resolution for Issue 28
RESOLUTION: Issue 28 can be closed
<eric> Phil's email: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-soap-jms/2010Apr/0003.html
Phil: Temporarily modified testcases.xml to remove WSDL tests and built a new testcases document to find out which assertions are not covered. Observations in email.
Eric: Regarding proposal 5 - if using jndi how can you force the test to use a topic
Phil: The object defined to jndi wouldhave to be defined to be a topic - don't think the test needs to go as far as checking the object type to enforce it being a topic
Mark: Following that line of thought we *could* remove proposal 5 because everything we get out of jndi is a JMSDestination, but happy to leave it in
Peter: Agreed - feels more secure to leave it in
<scribe> ACTION: Phil to implement the test coverage proposals [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/04/13-soap-jms-minutes.html#action02]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-160 - Implement the test coverage proposals [on Phil Adams - due 2010-04-20].
Eric: Will not be available next
week - nor will Amy, so no TIBCO reps.... propose we skip next
week's call and work on actions
... Need to think about how we get two different
implementations that we can test together
Phil: Do we need two implementations from different companies?
Eric: Technically not, but it
would be preferable
... The CXF project has an implementation, so that plus a
vendor project would be sufficient
Phil: Is anyone from the working group companies involved in CXF?
Eric: Barrier to involvement with Apache projects should be fairly low
Next call - usual time 27th April
This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.135 of Date: 2009/03/02 03:52:20 Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/ Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00) No ScribeNick specified. Guessing ScribeNick: mphillip Found Scribe: Mark Default Present: padams, Peter_Easton, alewis, +1.708.246.aaaa, +0196270aabb, Mark, eric, Derek Present: padams Peter_Easton alewis +1.708.246.aaaa +0196270aabb Mark eric Derek Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-soap-jms/2010Apr/0005.html WARNING: No meeting chair found! You should specify the meeting chair like this: <dbooth> Chair: dbooth Found Date: 13 Apr 2010 Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2010/04/13-soap-jms-minutes.html People with action items: phil WARNING: Input appears to use implicit continuation lines. You may need the "-implicitContinuations" option.[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]