[cgl_discussion] POC 12/03/03 Meeting Agenda
mehaf at mvista.com
Tue Dec 2 21:45:45 PST 2003
Thanks for the feedback.
Fleischer, Julie N wrote:
>>The agenda for the 12/03/03 POC meeting is to work through
>>analyzing as many of the potential defects raised by John
>>Mehaffey in a prevoius posting to this mailing list.
>>We will also discuss errata schedule.
> Steve -
> I will most likely be ~30 minutes late to this meeting because of a
> meeting conflict here. I started looking over John Mehaffey's
> suggestions, and they looked like good catches. I did have some
> questions in the "reference to non-existent section" section. I wasn't
> sure what those were refering to. For AVL.3.1, there is a 3.8.1 in CGL
> 1.1, but for AVL.3.5, there isn't a 3.8.5 (I stopped there....).
There is a 3.8.1, but it doesn't talk about Software Remote Upgrade and
Installation (AVL.3.1). There is no requirement in 1.1 for SRU&I.
> For some of the later comments, some are decisions made at the time the
> specs were created (P2 and P3s are in the P1 section when they have a
> parent in P1;
If you want to keep related things together, then you should go all the
way and complete each category with all priorities. The way it is now is
misleading - the heading that says Priority 3 requirements has only one
item in it, but there are actually four P3s in the General Systems
Requirements section (quick, now, what are they?)
> fast reboot was a requirement we caught at the last minute
> for 2.0, so it was added in as AVL.fast.*, deferred, since we didn't
> have time to finish it;
My point was that AVL.fast.1 speaks to Fast System Boot, not necessarily
fast reboot. If both are covered, AVL.fast.1 should reference both
4.7 (P1) and 4.13 (P2).
> CGL P1/P2/P3 requirements that were ignored were
> done so intentionally to drop, although someone from specs may want to
> double check the list.).
If they were intentionally dropped, they should be in the list in section
8 (Requirements in Version 1.1 not included in Version 2.0)
> If the POC meeting ends early, I'll contact you afterwards. I'd be
> willing to help investigate (and get final answers for) some of the
> items I just wrote about or other items on John Mehaffey's list if POC
> was taking volunteers.
> - Julie
MontaVista Technical Marketing
More information about the cgl_discussion