Meeting minutes
Minutes
Fady: we discussed a possible test suite for discovery
McCool: we still need to finalize it
Fady: minutes ok?
Pull Requests
PR 207
<kaz> PR 207 - update date of next Testfest/Plugfest to 03.2022
Fady: minor PR just updated the directories and file names to be ready for the next plug fest
McCool: we should discuss the follow up pf
… in particular about having it in person or virtual
… and thinking about the schedule
… we have PR transition in November and a CR transition is due to end of August
<McCool> wot PR 1012 - Update Plan due to delay in Discovery, TD 1.1, CR/PR typo
McCool: for mid-april we need an implementation report draft
… for profile we need an implementation report draft for end of August
… tpac is scheduled for 12-16 September
… having an in person PF the week before or the week after
… another option might be having a PF in July which was the original plan
Fady: yes
McCool: since we have a TPAC in September we could have a third PF
Ege: generally I like having a PF in TPAC
… if TPAC is physical I would vote for having one
… but I would split PF and TestFest
Lagally: I have different opinion, you can optimize time
Ege: I'm afraid that we'll lose focus on the implementation Report
McCool: right, the current plan is to have them mixed now but different sync meetings
… doing the same thing for mid july make sense
… all the testing should be done before September
Lagally: if it is a physical event it make sense to build demos
McCool: I agree but demos are separate activities
… my plan is to add TPAC on the calendar, about PF will see
Kaz: From my viewpoint, what is more important is to understand who is going to take the lead for each event
Kaz: regardless of whether event is going to be physical or not, we need to clarify who to take the lead, how to organize the events, what kind of repository structure to be used, etc.
Tools
Fady: we already have a tool to merge CSV files
… and generate a final implementation report
… we also need tools for other specs like Discovery and Profile
Ege: we have something for Discoveryy
… probably one test report per discovery implementation
… farshid has his testing tool
McCool: yeah
… we need to test consumers
… we need two consumer implementations
Ege: why merge? just counting
McCool: not may assertions on the consumer side
Cristiano: how can we test introductions?
McCool: just the one that have assertions
Ege: I have a discovery consumer
Cristiano: webthings has an implementation for mDNS too
McCool: we should get organized
… also about ThingModels and testing tools
Fady: I'm working on it
… I'm more concerned about other tools
Cristiano: Is it the thing model process normative?
McCool: not sure
… also do we have two implementations
Fady: if I understand correctly we already have two implementations
McCool: yeah we have to processors
… but we also need to have a set of thing models (i.e. examples)
… from two organizations
Cristiano: we had some thing models
… but we didn't cover all the features for sure
Ege: TUM published Thing Models too
… but as partial TDs
McCool: which is the timeline for having the assertion testing tool?
Fady: two weeks from now
McCool: then I'll open an issue for having discovery too
McCool: what about logistics? WebEx?
Kaz: we can use zoom as well
McCool: I have no strong preference, but if I have to choose webex would be preferred
Ege: we can't install zoom client as Siemens
McCool: Intel uses Teams
McCool: test fest would be only for wg
… so we don't have particular requirements
Kaz: we can allocate a dedicated WebEx call and share the link to all the invited guests ( for the plug fest)
Cristiano: I think we have to think about what we have to do
… if we have particular requirements that webex can't do
Kaz: from my viewpoint, there's no particular difference
McCool: let's keep it simple
… and use webex
Kaz: ok I can allocate WebEx calls based on the currently proposed schedule
Fady: no complaints about the schedule
Fady: adjourned
<kaz> [adjourned]