1 / 9

STF 393

STF 393. MTS#50 Decisions. CR priorities high : bug fixes (editorials go “automatically to editors”, clarifications normal : minor additions low : major additions CRs are processed according to class priorities within the class according to submission date (FIFO)

seamus
Télécharger la présentation

STF 393

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. STF 393

  2. MTS#50 Decisions • CR priorities • high: bug fixes (editorials go “automatically to editors”, clarifications • normal: minor additions • low: major additions • CRs are processed according to class priorities • within the class according to submission date (FIFO) • MTS can “fast track” specific CRs: use urgent prio for this • How to avoid too much delay of low prio CRs due to too many high and normal prio ones? -> considered to be a non-issue at the moment, to be re-discussed if the situation occurs • exceptions for CRs felt to be of high prio? • weighting: 5 prio1, 2 prio2, 1 prio1 ?

  3. CR Status • new • the status when a CR is submitted or at the beginning of a new STF • clarification of the content (STF) • assigned • preparing an analysis and (alternative) solution(s) (CR responsible) • analysis and alternatives discussed (STF)-> principal solution can be taken by the STF-> vendors shall be involved (not-backward compatibility) to agree the principal solution (managed by CR responsible); • proposed text to be prepared by CR responsible • review of proposed text (iteratively) (reviewer, CR resp.) • feedback • the CR is waiting an additional input from the provider or tool vendors • vendors list to be updated! • resolved • final agreed text of changes in the standard(s) exists (CR resp.) • CR resp. assigns the CR to the rapporteur • closed • standard rapporteur implements text in the draft • PLS. always include the no.s of implemented CRs into the HISTORY of the draft • Set the Fixed in Version and Resolution fields in Mantis (if not et done)

  4. CR Resolution • open • default when the CR is entering • fixed • Action is taken on the CR (error correction, clarification is added, new feature added, solution not necessarily as proposed in the CR) • won’t fix • The problem described by the CR is outdated or based on a misunderstanding, no further action is taken on the CR • reopened • The submitter is not satisfied with the STF solution in a resolved/closed and wants to re-open the CR • duplicate • the CR (or its resolution) is handled together with another CR due to technical similarities

  5. CR process (cont.d) • CR admittance closed • At the beginning of the last session (or earlier?) • For the last session only bugfix CRs are admitted (as new ones) • Last session is mainly to “clean up” CRs already being processed (final agreements and drafting of text) • Open questions: • If a CR effects more than 1 parts • the CR will be cloned per person (rapporteur or assigned CR responsible) to allow working in parallel and make resolution and implementation track-able

  6. CR process (cont.d) • Rapporteur • Shall follow the progress of CRs related to his/her document • Rapporteurs (equals to editors, unless decided differently): • Part-1: Ina • Part-4: Jens • Part-5: Ina • Part-6: Ina • Part-7: Gyorgy • Part-8: Gyorgy • Part-9: Gyorgy • Part-10:Gyorgy • Ext. Behaviour types: Jens • Ext. Adv. param.: Jens • Ext. Depl. & config.: Jens • Ext. Perf.& real time: Jens • Ref. TS framework: Benjamin

  7. STF transparency • STF session plan to be sent on MTS_GEN • CR classification to be sent on MTS mailing list at the beginning of each session • CR resolution summary to be sent on MTS_GEN at the end of each session • After the 2nd STF session • CR resolution summary (cumulative) to be sent over the MTS_GEN list • CR summary meeting (by phone/on line meeting), invitation to be sent over MTS_GEN • Next editions • Interim versions mid 2010; non-official, to be uploaded to MTS drafts area; no extra work should be put on this but CR resolution should be scheduled to make this possible (Part-6: .NET mapping preferably should be incl.); • ES 201 873-1, -4, -5, -6, -7, -8, -9, -10 v4.3.1,to be delivered by end of December 2010, internally should be mid Dec. • Extension packages and Ref. TS: next subsequent version no.to be delivered by end of December 2010, internally should be mid Dec. • Ref. TS: STF 393’s responsibility is to maintain the framework only, no test cases to be added (MTS requests for a separate STF from the 2nd allocation)

  8. Urgent issues for w12 • Part-1, Part-4 • CRs reporting errors: CR5490, CR5486, CR5343 • 3GPP issues: CR5174 • Part-5, -6 • CR5485+CR5489 • CR5174 • CR5394/CR5395 .NET mapping: check if possible in v4.2.1 or in the interim (see prev. slide) • Part-7 • CR5212, CR5342 • Part-9 • CR5465 • Ref. TS: • create one ETS document from the 3 already delivered • Discuss and give a rough estimate of testable requirements in the core • in terms of number • in terms of required mMonth (for a req. catalogue) • Editorial CRs acc. to classification • v4.2.1 parts shall be final-finalized by this Friday; Gyorgy sends a list of updated parts to Laurent on Friday • STF presentation in Beijing, T3UC • Decide presenter • Content of the presentation (at least at the skeleton level)

  9. AOB • None

More Related