This wiki is locked. Future workgroup activity and specification development must take place at our new wiki. For more information, see this blog post about the new governance model and this post about changes to the website.
Meeting 19th April 2010

Agenda

Apologies: NickKruk? , SimonWills

Attendees: IanGreen, DominicTulley, JeremyDick, ScottBosworth, DaveJohnston? , PaulMcMahan, TorgeKummerow

Minutes:

PaulM? : is the responsibility of the RM provider to maintain n-step downstream links rather than the 1-step links. Scott: both valid. Role OSLC plays here is debateable. OSLC can define the links that are involved (and also extensible relationship types). Jeremy: Link from requirement to build different from links between requirements/test cases. Any linking capability should be without prejudice to link type.

Torge: All requirements are "chaptered" .

Scott What assumptions do we make about the definition of a collection? Paul: does a collection allow us to avoid adding formal properties to requirements because it is ad hoc. Eg inm the AM scenario should a collection be "all things allocated to a sprint".

Scott: is collection-collection asserted or derived? Paul: does collection deal with hierarchy

Topic revision: r2 - 19 Apr 2010 - 16:03:10 - IanGreen
 
This site is powered by the TWiki collaboration platform Copyright � by the contributing authors. All material on this collaboration platform is the property of the contributing authors.
Contributions are governed by our Terms of Use
Ideas, requests, problems regarding this site? Send feedback