[cgl_discussion] Minutes for Requirements meeting - 4/8

John Cherry cherry at osdl.org
Mon Apr 8 10:06:04 PDT 2002




-------------- next part --------------
Minutes for the Requirements Meeting - 4/8/2002

Attendees
---------
Peter
John (scribe)
Randy
Ville
Karl
Craig
Terence

Not attending
-------------
Tim
Khalid

Note: Minutes will be taken on a rotating basis.

230 - Priority 1
    - Break out the last subrequirement as a separate priority 3
      entry.  Remove the reference to "all" free space.
231 - Does not fit into the single system constraint.
    - May be some of this capability out there, but will need to be
      investigated.
    - Defer priority call until the architecture group looks at this.
245 - Change "the remote" to "a remote".
    - syslog already supports this, so don't do anything dumb to
      prevent this.
    - Priority 1
250.0 - Montavista has the approach.  There is work going on in 2.5
        that would address this.
250.1 - Priority 2
250.2 - Needs to be rewritten.  Spec in progress by Montavista.
      - Priority 2

AI (Terence) - Correct the text on 250.2

250.1 - Priority 2
255.0 - See Ville's comments on this.  This is split in two parts.  The
        first is probably priority 1 and the second priority 2.

AI (Ville) - to look at the wording for 255.

260.0

AI (Peter) - Reword 260.x for remove ambiguity.

260.1 - Really don't have a spec on this.  IBM/Intel has opened a project on
        sourceforge, but nothing is really open on that site yet.  Spec
	should be available within a month.
      - Priority 1

AI (Imad, Terence) - make sure the online diagnostic spec is available to OSDL.

260.2 - Priority 1
260.3 - Priority 1
      - CIM schema is off the shelf and CGL implementation should not be
        imcompatible.

285.x - Remove.  Contained in 3.*
300 - Remove. Contained in 3.10
290 - Remove. Contained in 3.*
320 - Remove. Rationale for 3.11
320.1 - Remove. Rationale for 3.11
325.* - Priority 2
    - Another spec, API, and framework that needs to be developed.
330 - Should define what improvement should be?
    - Should be reworded to say that scaleable performance is achieved
      with multiple controllers.
    - Priority 2.  Perhaps a benchmark would define this well enough
      to bump up the priority.
335.* - Priority 2
340 - Remove
345 - Remove
350.* - Need additional information from Nokia.

AI (Ville) - Close the loop on additional information for 350.*

355 - Priority 2
    - Need communication with architecture subgroup
357 - Priority 2
    - Need communication with architecture subgroup
358 - Priority 2
    - Need communication with architecture subgroup
360 - Remove.  Already exists.
365 - Kernel patch exists for this.
    - Priority 2
370 - Needs gap analysis.  What kinds of additional profiling is
      needed?
    - Priority 2

AI (Ville) - Validate with Nokia to determine what kinds of additional
             profiling is needed.

373 - Needs clarification.
    - Strike GUI.  Need I/F.

AI (Karl) - Clarification for 373.  Could be dropped.  By next Monday.

375 - Remove.  Capabilities exist.
380 - Needs clarification on what is actually needed.

AI (Ville) - Clarification in the wording "failover" for 380.  Could be 
             dropped.  By next Monday.

385 - Priority 2
    - Third bullet can be removed.
390 - Priority 2
    - Are we supporting clustering?  Needs architecture clarification.
395 - Remove
400 - Needs spec and API
    - Must be optional
    - Need to remove the catch-all category
    - Priority 2




More information about the cgl_discussion mailing list