Re: [epf-dev] Alternate SPEM 2.0 submission

[Peter Haumer <phaumer@xxxxxxxxxx>]

I was asked to comment on this by other
EPF committers who seem to be confused about the fact there is a second
proposal.

The specification the Eclipse Process
Framework is built on is available at http://www.omg.org/cgi-bin/doc?ad/06-06-02

The Adaptive/Fujitsu/ESI/IBM/Softeam
et al spec is technically sound and proven by implementing most of the
concepts in EPF Composer. As EPF and SPEM evolve, our submission team will
continue to help drive convergence of open source and open standards.

Eclipse (and the EPF project)  has
a community driven process in which only people who do real work on real
code can make a difference. We encourage the SPEM team led by Osellus  to
directly influence EPF the way in which all Eclipse projects are influenced
- by adding committers to the project.



Thanks and best regards,
Peter Haumer.

______________________________________________________________

PETER HAUMER, Dr. rer. nat.
Rational Method Composer | Eclipse Process Framework
Rational Software | IBM Software Group
Tel.: +1 408 863-8716
______________________________________________________________

"Kamal Ahluwalia" <kamal@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent by: epf-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx

06/09/2006 17:19

Please respond to
Eclipse Process Framework Project Developers List <epf-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>

To	<epf-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
cc
Subject	[epf-dev] Alternate SPEM 2.0 submission

Hi EPF Content Committers
 
I wanted to take this opportunity
to update you on SPEM 2.0 progress at the OMG. 
 
As I had indicated in an earlier
post to this newsgroup (http://dev.eclipse.org/mhonarc/lists/epf-dev/msg00312.html),
Osellus, with support from Sun Microsystems and Microsoft had asked for
a single meeting cycle extension (about 3 months) at the last OMG Technical
Committee Meeting in St. Louis. The OMG unanimously approved this extension
to provide an opportunity for the presentation of an alternative SPEM 2.0
submission. Borland who was a co-submitter of IBM-led submission also decided
to join us as a co-submitter of this alternate Borland/Osellus/Microsoft/Sun
submission.  This proposal uses some concepts of the previous proposal
co-submitted by Adaptive, Borland, ESI, Fujitsu, IBM, Osellus and Softeam.

 
A copy of this alternate submission
is attached. It has also been uploaded to the OMG server, http://www.omg.org/cgi-bin/doc?ad/06-06-01.
 
We are seeking the feedback of
software process experts and end users on this submission. We would like
to invite EPF content committers, and in particular the OpenUp committers,
to provide your feedback on this meta-model.  We are more than open
to consider your suggestions and recommendations to make this proposal
more applicable and meaningful.   We are prepared to commit the necessary
resources to take a representative sample of the processes and methodologies
of your choosing to validate our proposed SPEM 2.0 meta-model.  To
the extent that you may be open to this idea, we would like to incorporate
parts of your methodologies as examples in the next draft of the proposal.
 
Our goal in this submission is
to avoid unnecessary complexity.  The submission maintains a balance
between process content and process workflow, is backwards compatible with
SPEM 1.1, is completely methodology agnostic, and addresses the increasingly
strategic differentiator of process enactment. Our submission is not restricted
by the capabilities of any existing commercially available tool in the
market.  However, Osellus is fully committed to offer the required
toolware to model and enact SPEM 2.0, once the specification is ratified,
irrespective of the form it takes.
 
Thanks,
Kamal.
 
kamal@xxxxxxxxxxx
 [attachment
"SPEM 2.pdf" deleted by Peter Haumer/Cupertino/IBM] _______________________________________________
epf-dev mailing list
epf-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/epf-dev