Re: HA: [mdt-ocl.dev] Compatibility Support

[Ed Willink <ed@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

When I wrote:
> If the sole purpose of 1.4.0 is to provide a slightly more confidence 
> inspiring name than 1.3.3 for Helios then I have no problem with 
> someone doing that. I just don't have time to contribute to any 
> problems that arise as a result. If the intention is to offer more 
> than maintenance functionality in 3.3 please elaborate.
>
> I think we should proceed with OCL 2.2 as far as we can understand it 
> on MDT-OCL 2.0.0 and address any real compatibility issues as they arise.
I was trying to find out what option A means. I would still like to know 
what is planned for inclusion in 1.4.0, for which I provided my best 
guess above. (Alex's original proposal discussed the practicalities of 
A/B but did not discuss content.)

In the above I was sort of suggesting that perhaps we do both A and B 
since there may not really be very much difference.

Moving to a vote is not very helpful, because I certainly do not 
understand what we are actually voting on. We will only have another 
discussion later on as to what the result of the vote meant.

   Regards

      Ed Willink