[Css-csts] updated Errata sheets and posting them on the CWE

[John Pietras]

Dear Wolfgang,
Yes, we need some way to keep from simultaneously updating the same errata sheets. I agree with you that it is often more convenient to update an offline copy and replace the current on-line copy (I guess we’re both “old school” in that sense).

Fortunately right now it is only the two of us who are working with and updating the errata sheets (with exceptions for CFDP (Holger) and eventually CCSDS 415 (Tim)). For now, how about we try something like this: consider the personal responsible for a given FR to be the master of the corresponding errata sheet. It is assumed that the master can make changes to the errata sheets as desired and upload revisions when he is comfortable to do so. After uploading one or more revised errata sheets the master sends out an email identifying which errata sheets have been updated.

When the other (non-master) wants to update an errata sheet, he requests (by email) that the latest versions of the identified errata sheets be put on the CWE. If the master has made intermediate changes to one or more of the sheets, he uploads his latest working copies. The master then replies, naming which of the requested sheets have not changed since the last announced upload and which have been updated since the last announce upload. Custody of those errata sheets is now transferred to the other.

The other can then download those latest version(s) that have been recently updated and (a) check to see if the status of existing open items has been changed in the interim and respond as appropriate and/or (b) add new errata items that the other wants to put in. When the other has made whatever changes he wants, he uploads the revised versions and sends an email announcing the identity of the updated sheets. Custody of those sheets then returns to the master.

Note that this process does not prohibit either the master of the other from recording changes/new items when he does not have custody of a sheet. However, it is the responsibility of the person to whom custody has been transferred to check the latest version to see if his new updates are in any way affected or overcome by the person who had custody and modify his responses accordingly. For example, If both the master and the other simultaneously generate proposed solutions to a previously identified problem while the errata sheet is in the custody of the master, when the other requests the latest version, the master uploads the version with his (the master’s) proposed solution. Upon downloading and reviewing the latest update, the other should respond to the issue in light of the master’s proposed solution – e.g., by deciding that the master’s solution is preferable to his and concurring outright, proposing a modified solution that blends the master’s proposal with his, pointing out latent problems with the master’s proposed solution and proposing an alternative (which may or may not include aspects of the other’s original intended solution), etc.

I know this sounds like a lot of process, but I think that in practice it won’t be so hard. And hopefully it will keep us from having to constantly re-synchronize simultaneously developed updates.

Do you want to try this approach? For the next few days I need to be concentrating on the updates to the FF-CSTS book (deliverable due at the end of this week). I will assume that any of “your” errata sheets that you have uploaded since the end of the meeting are the latest and I will work from them. If and when I am ready to respond to any of them I will first ask if you have any intermediate updates.

Regarding the TD-related FRs, I don’t know if we came to any formal decisions in the WG but I am thinking that it would be a good target for “Tier 2” (or Tier 3, if we think of Tier 2 as the USLP FRs), to be worked in the spring. Nothing formal has been decided but I’ve expressed willingness to work at least a bit beyond the end of the year and maybe that could be part of my work during that time.

Best regards,
John

From: Wolfgang Hell <wo_._he at t-online.de>
Sent: Tuesday, November 12, 2019 10:24 AM
To: John Pietras <john.pietras at gst.com>
Cc: Holger.Dreihahn at esa.int; harald.ernst at esa.int; Pham, Timothy T (3300) <Timothy.T.Pham at jpl.nasa.gov>; CCSDS_CSTSWG (css-csts at mailman.ccsds.org) <css-csts at mailman.ccsds.org>
Subject: Re: updated Errata sheets and posting them on the CWE

Dear John,

Thank you for creating the folder on the CWE. I have uploaded to that folder all those errata sheets that as a result of the Fall Meeting needed to be updated. It turned out that we indeed need a mechanism for synchronizing our activities because you and I have updated in a few cases the same errata sheets in parallel. I have tried to merge the updates in the version that I have uploaded now to the CWE. Hopefully I did not lose anything in that process.

We now have almost all errata sheets for the tier 1 FR types. Missing are CfdpEntity, FrameDataSink, OfflineFrameBuffer and MDCstsProvider. I'm not certain what we decided regarding the TD-CSTS and the associated FR types.

I would like to resume now updating the .frm specification of the various FR types assigned to me. In that context I would appreciate if the addressees could check if they concur with what I have recorded in terms of outcome of the Fall Meeting in the errata sheets. There are also a number of related action items that are still open. If I could have the responses to those actions soon, it will probably reduce the number of update cycles I will need for finalizing the FR type specifications.

Looking forward to your feedback!

Best regards,
Wolfgang



Am 05.11.2019 um 23:52 schrieb John Pietras:
Dear Wolfgang,
Okay, we can start simple (no intermediate hierarchy) and change that if it becomes unmanageable.

We don’t have to make the edits on-line. Instead, we can upload files revised files with the same filename, and SharePoint provides the option to treat the new upload as a new version. We only have to make sure to delete previous versions if the file names change, e.g., to remove Fwd and Rtn prefixes.

While the CWE (SharePoint) will keep the version modification dates straight, I am a bit concerned that once one downloads a file that information is lost and the operating system stamps the file with the date/time of the download. I can see myself getting confused and accidentally working with/updating an older version on my computer and not the latest one on the CWE. I’d like to suggest that in the Status line for every Errata sheet we include a sentence along the line of “This version was generated on <date> by <name of person who updated the file>.” Then if someone has two errata documents with the same name they need only to look at the Status line to know which is the most recent. (Note that the generation date may not necessarily be the same as the date that the file is uploaded to the CWE. )

I have created the Functional Resource Errata Sheets folder within the CWE Functional Resources Definition folder:
https://cwe.ccsds.org/css/docs/CSS-CSTS/CWE%20Private/Functional%20Resources%20Definition/Functional%20Resource%20Errata%20Sheets/

and uploaded the 11 errata sheets that I have updated, with the data stamps and author initials removed from the file names. I also included the generation data in the version information field for each file to provide further traceability. The Version History for any file can be read by clicking on the ellipses (…) next to the file name, and then clicking on the ellipses (…) at the bottom of the box that pops up.

I hope that you find this workable and useful.

Best regards,
John


From: Wolfgang Hell <wo_._he at t-online.de><mailto:wo_._he at t-online.de>
Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2019 9:25 AM
To: John Pietras <john.pietras at gst.com><mailto:john.pietras at gst.com>
Cc: Holger.Dreihahn at esa.int<mailto:Holger.Dreihahn at esa.int>; harald.ernst at esa.int<mailto:harald.ernst at esa.int>; Pham, Timothy T (3300) <Timothy.T.Pham at jpl.nasa.gov><mailto:Timothy.T.Pham at jpl.nasa.gov>
Subject: Re: updated Errata sheets and posting them on the CWE

Dear John,

The fact that meanwhile we have so many Errata Sheet files is attributable to the fact that for our convenience each time we changed something we changed the file name so that from that file name the date and editor is obvious. There is however no good reason to keep all the files for the same FR type with an earlier issue date than the latest one because we both kept all items in the file even though they had been closed. I'm advocating to continue doing that because more than once it proved useful to be able to go back and figure out why certain decisions had been taken. That means that there is no reason for an ever growing number of documents, but we only need the most recent errata sheet for each FR type. Given that within the folder I can sort by FR name (classifier) or release date and so far that was all I needed. I'm not opposed to intermediate folders, but I do not see a real need for them.

SharePoint on the CWE may be a good way to go, but I have no experience with working on online copies of files. I would not like to depend on being always online when working on Errata Sheets. But other than that I agree that we should "publish" the Errata Sheets on the CWE.

Best regards,

Wolfgang


Am 04.11.2019 um 17:31 schrieb John Pietras:
CSTSWG colleagues ---
At the Fall 2019 Workshop, we resolved a number of questions/issues regarding various FRs, and Wolfgang and I agreed to update their respective errata sheets. For my part, I initially had 3 errata sheets to update – TCMcMux, TcVcMux, and FCltuTsProvider. There was one issue common to all transfer service provider FRs (related to network and ISP-1 parameter settings), so I updated the errata sheets for those FRs also. Al errata sheets that contain updates that are solely the result of decisions made at the fall meeting carry the date stamp “191024”. However, in updating the errata sheets, I came across a few new issues. Errata sheets that contain these new issues have date stamps of today – 191104. The updated errata sheets are attached.

I think that we briefly discussed putting the errata sheets on the CWE, but I don’t think that we made any specific plans. I propose that they should be uploaded to a new FR Errata Sheets folder in the CWE > Functional Resources Definition folder.  Beyond that, I think that we have 2 decisions to make.

The first decision is whether to just put all of the FR errata sheets directly into the FR Errata Sheets folder, or to introduce in intermediate set of folders. Personally I would like to see an intermediate set of folders, because otherwise we will have a long (and over time, increasingly long) list of documents that will be organized by FR name (classifier). A relatively simple set of intermediate folders could be named for the FR strata: Aperture, Physical Channel, etc. If we choose to go this way (or to use a different set of intermediate folders) I will put those folders into the CWE.

The second decision is on the naming of the errata sheets. So far Wolfgang and I have been including a data stamp and our initials in the names of the files to keep them sorted out. However, by using the SharePoint-based CWE, we have the opportunity to keep just the one copy of the file and perform our updates to the online copy. Wolfgang and I have already established a pattern for labeling our updates with our initial and a data stamp, so traceability of changes shouldn’t be an issue.

I am interested in hearing your comments.

Best regards,
John




-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.ccsds.org/pipermail/css-csts/attachments/20191112/48858dc0/attachment-0001.html>