Re: Test Indicator Issue

[christopher ferris <chris.ferris@east.sun.com>]

Bob,

Yes, that works. I think though that we should have
the votes certified on or before the seventh day
following the conference call in which they are cast.
We should probably not use a butterfly ballot
either, unless we all want our votes cast for
some obscure and unrelated option.

Chris ;-)

"Miller, Robert (GXS)" wrote:
> 
> Chris,
> 
> My ballot option two reads:
> 
>       2 - Application (MSH MUST pass the message to the "test application")
>           (The mechanics of how it does so is implementation dependent)
> 
> which is where I cast my vote.  If you really feel your option 2 is
> appropriate to ballot, then I ask that a runoff be held if none of the three
> gathers a majority.
> And of course, if any ballots come in with hanging or dimpled chad, we'll
> have to have a recount.
> 
> Cheers,
>         Bob
> -----Original Message-----
> From: christopher ferris [mailto:chris.ferris@east.sun.com]
> Sent: Monday, November 27, 2000 11:52 AM
> To: Miller, Robert (GXS)
> Cc: ebxml-transport@lists.ebxml.org
> Subject: Re: Test Indicator Issue
> 
> I'm getting the sense that there seems to be some
> consensus on the need for a test indicator, but that
> the scope of its use/intent seems to be at issue.
> 
>         1 - MSH only (MUST NOT pass message to "application")
>         2 - undefined (MSH MAY pass message to "application"
>                 along with test indicator and allow application
>                 to figure out what to do)
> 
> Have I captured this sense correctly?
> 
> Can we agree to have the vote on this aspect?
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Chris
> 
> "Miller, Robert (GXS)" wrote:
> >
> > Dick,
> >
> > The tables which select the URL to which to deliver the payloads, whether
> > these tables be in the application code on in some middleware, would have
> to
> > differ between the production system and the test system.  And there might
> > be dozens of URL's each of which needs both a production and a development
> > entry.  And the tables might be stored in the same database as other
> tables,
> > so when a database is copied from prodcution to test, the changes have to
> be
> > re-introduced.
> >
> > Cheers,
> >         Bob
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Dick Brooks [mailto:dick@8760.com]
> > Sent: Monday, November 27, 2000 9:56 AM
> > To: Miller, Robert (GXS); Nikola Stojanovic;
> > ebxml-transport@lists.ebxml.org
> > Subject: RE: Test Indicator Issue
> >
> > Bob,
> >
> > I don't understand how separate test/production URL's does the following:
> >
> > > referenced below.  But I contend that these other ways reduce the
> > > parallelism of the test system to a greater extent than does a test
> flag.
> >
> > Please explain. Thanks.
> >
> > Dick Brooks
> > Group 8760
> > 110 12th Street North
> > Birmingham, AL 35203
> > dick@8760.com
> > 205-250-8053
> > Fax: 205-250-8057
> > http://www.8760.com/
> >
> > InsideAgent - Empowering e-commerce solutions
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Miller, Robert (GXS) [mailto:Robert.Miller@gxs.ge.com]
> > > Sent: Monday, November 27, 2000 9:23 AM
> > > To: Nikola Stojanovic; ebxml-transport@lists.ebxml.org
> > > Subject: RE: Test Indicator Issue
> > >
> > >
> > > List-Unsubscribe:
> > >  <mailto:ebxml-transport-request@lists.ebxml.org?body=unsubscribe>
> > > List-Archive: <http://lists.ebxml.org/archives/ebxml-transport>
> > > List-Help: <http://lists.ebxml.org/doc/email-manage.html>,
> > >  <mailto:ebxml-transport-request@lists.ebxml.org?body=help>
> > >
> > > Yes there are other ways to indicate a 'test' message, two of which are
> > > referenced below.  But I contend that these other ways reduce the
> > > parallelism of the test system to a greater extent than does a test
> flag.
> > > Use of a test flag is a proven practice. So my advice is add the
> > > test flag -
> > > "If it ain't broke, don't fix it!"
> > >
> > > Cheers,
> > >        Bob Miller
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Nikola Stojanovic [mailto:nhomest1@twcny.rr.com]
> > > Sent: Monday, November 27, 2000 8:57 AM
> > > To: ebxml-transport@lists.ebxml.org
> > > Subject: Re: First issue [was: Outstanding Issues - LONG please red to
> > > end}
> > >
> > >
> > > <Dick Brooks>
> > > There are others means to indicate a "test" versus "production" message
> > > exchange. For example:
> > > - separate production and test ebxml handler URL's (mailboxes, FTP
> sites,
> > > etc.)
> > > - separate production and test Party ID's
> > > </Dick Brooks>
> > >
> > > Makes sense. I agree.
> > >
> > > Nikola
> > >
begin:vcard 
n:Ferris;Christopher
tel;cell:508-667-0402
tel;work:781-442-3063
x-mozilla-html:FALSE
adr:;;;;;;
version:2.1
email;internet:chris.ferris@east.sun.com
fn:Christopher Ferris
end:vcard