[Openid-specs-risc] [EXTERNAL] Re: SSE profile spec approach

[Atul Tulshibagwale]

Hi all,

I have made this change that Mike suggested. The new file name is "
openid-sse-profile-1_0.xml
<https://bitbucket.org/openid/risc/src/caep-draft-01/openid-sse-profile-1_0.xml>",
and the version number is updated in the draft. I have renamed the output
text file as well.

Thanks,
Atul

On Thu, Dec 10, 2020 at 10:20 AM Mike Jones <Michael.Jones at microsoft.com>
wrote:

> This is a 1.0 spec version - not a 2.0 version. Please rename accordingly.
> Thanks.
>
> -- Mike
>
> Sent via the Samsung Galaxy S8 Active, an AT&T 5G Evolution capable
> smartphone
> Get Outlook for Android <https://aka.ms/ghei36>
>
> ------------------------------
> *From:* Atul Tulshibagwale <atultulshi at google.com>
> *Sent:* Thursday, December 10, 2020 9:38:37 AM
> *To:* Mike Jones <Michael.Jones at microsoft.com>
> *Cc:* openid-specs-risc at lists.openid.net <
> openid-specs-risc at lists.openid.net>
> *Subject:* Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: [Openid-specs-risc] SSE profile spec
> approach
>
> Thanks Mike, for your guidance.
>
> As recommended by Mike, I have done the following (on the caep-draft-01
> <https://bitbucket.org/openid/risc/src/caep-draft-01/> branch):
>
>    1. Merged the file that we were working on
>    "openid-sse-profile-2_0.xml" into the original file
>    "openid-risc-profile-1_0.xml"
>    2. Removed the separately created "openid-sse-profile-2_0.xml" file.
>    3. Renamed the "openid-risc-profile-1_0.xml" to
>    "openid-sse-profile-2_0.xml". This new file now retains all the changes to
>    the earlier RISC profile, and therefore does not lose the git history.
>    4. Retained previous authors (assuming they are OK with the changes
>    being made).
>
> Hopefully this resolves the issue of being able to easily see the changes
> from the previous draft, while preserving the work in the working group
> over the past several months.
>
> The following changes need to be done before merging to the HEAD branch:
>
>    1. Remove the IANA section and reword other sections appropriately.
>    2. Agree on the versioning and how we can refer to the RISC profile
>    that some have implemented.
>    3. Other issues that may come up.
>
> Atul
>
> On Tue, Dec 8, 2020 at 4:34 PM Mike Jones <Michael.Jones at microsoft.com>
> wrote:
>
> To the extent that the new document is an update to the existing RISC
> specification, it would be much cleaner to update the existing doc rather
> than creating a parallel specification that duplicates some of the
> content.  It would be good to merge the proposed changes into the existing
> doc.
>
>
>
>                            -- Mike (writing as OpenID Foundation Secretary)
>
>
>
> *From:* Openid-specs-risc <openid-specs-risc-bounces at lists.openid.net> *On
> Behalf Of *Atul Tulshibagwale via Openid-specs-risc
> *Sent:* Tuesday, December 8, 2020 11:06 AM
> *To:* Openid-specs-risc <openid-specs-risc at lists.openid.net>
> *Subject:* [EXTERNAL] Re: [Openid-specs-risc] SSE profile spec approach
>
>
>
> Missed the notes link:
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1ZFwJJDwwSBNKX35VObClC1ctMbMMuHJtr5qY-7xsLW8/edit?usp=sharing
>
>
>
> On Tue, Dec 8, 2020 at 11:05 AM Atul Tulshibagwale <atultulshi at google.com>
> wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> An update from the WG call today (notes here):
>
>
>
> While we all agree that the present SSE profile draft represents a
> revision of the RISC profile draft, we are unable to reach consensus on
> whether we can use the document named "openid-sse-profile-2_0.xml
> <https://bitbucket.org/openid/risc/src/caep-draft-01/openid-sse-profile-2_0.xml>"
> in the caep-draft-01
> <https://bitbucket.org/openid/risc/branch/caep-draft-01> branch as the
> basis for future commentary and updates, or whether we should create pull
> requests on the file named "openid-risc-profile-1_0.xml
> <https://bitbucket.org/openid/risc/src/master/openid-risc-profile-1_0.xml>"
> in the main branch, review the pull requests, and then use the resultant
> draft for future commentary and updates.
>
>
>
> We agreed in the call that we should ask the OpenID Foundation committee
> to opine on the way forward.
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Atul
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *Atul Tulshibagwale*
>
> Software Engineer,
>
> Google Workspace
>
> atultulshi at google.com
>
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openid.net/pipermail/openid-specs-risc/attachments/20201210/1056db49/attachment.html>