[MOBY-dev] [RFC] Exception Reporting in bioMOBY v1.5 - INB proposal

[David González Pisano]

Dear all,

Here you have the Exception (Errors) reporting Request for Comments 
document. We have included some interesting comments taken from 
discussions / lists and rewritten it to make it more clear. It presents 
only one proposal to deal with error information, although it has also 
presents an extension option to report errors related to Simples into 
Collections. That extension can be considerered optional (we in the INB 
will be using it anyways).

Please feel free to comment / discuss about it. Also, please feel free 
to use the document as guinea pig if we set up a procedure to deal with 
RFPs/RFCs in the MOBY community ;-)

Regards,

David

Martin Senger escribió:

>>>but the problem is that we do not have (still) a procedure how to make
>>>changes in the API.
>>>      
>>>
>>Correct.
>>
>>    
>>
>   So how are we going to solve this?
>   This is *a* solution (based on my experiences from the OMG process):
>
>   1) Anybody can make a suggestion to make a change in API (we can call
>it RFP - request for proposal, or RFC - request for comments, or
>whatever). An example of such thing are the proposals from Oswaldo and his
>collegues (eventhough I would not expect to have it always so perfectly
>written :-)). Important is that it must *say* this is a RFP/RFC, not just
>a wish in email. We will keep a place for it (bugzilla has wishlists?).
>
>   2) Then a calendar (deadline) must be attached to it. It can be
>suggested already by the author of the RFP/RFC, or a default value is
>attached. We need to say what is a default value.
>
>   3) The RFP can be considered only if the change is back-uped by two
>(three?) other developers. They do not need to fully agree with all
>details, their role is just to prevent overhelming number of small
>changes coming fast.
>
>   4) It is also considered only if somebody has resources to really
>implement the change. This should be also a part of the clendar ("when it
>can be done").
>
>   5) Discussion on RFC, changes re-distributed, etc. In charge is the
>author of the original RFC. Deadline can be extended - don't be too formal
>here.
>
>   6) Now the tricky part: I think taht there should be only few people
>(major developers) who can vote on it. This is called an "Architecture
>Board" at OMG and guarantees that the changes are hopefully not breaking
>other things.
>
>   7) Then comes implementation, documenttaion etc.
>
>   Cheers,
>   Martin
>
>  
>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: 0501INB-ExceptionReporting-v1.5.doc
Type: application/msword
Size: 139776 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.open-bio.org/pipermail/moby-dev/attachments/20050825/8c0dd56f/attachment-0001.doc>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: dgpisano.vcf
Type: text/x-vcard
Size: 338 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.open-bio.org/pipermail/moby-dev/attachments/20050825/8c0dd56f/attachment-0001.vcf>