Members of the OSLC OP, The Special Majority ballot to approve OSLC Core Version 3.0 as Project Specification 02 has closed and passed. You can find the ballot result at

Dear PGB members, The rules require us to notify you at least 14 days before submitting the ballots for the spec drafts publication. We are hereby notifying you of the OP intention to publish OSLC

Andrew, I just went with the oslc-op@ main mailing list. Let's see how this works out in practice. I think the collecting of comments is a topic that will benefit from some experimentation. So we're

"We'll address that in the next Version", nice addition to my co-chair vocabulary :D Regarding public comments, https://www.oasis-open.org/oasis-open-projects-handbook/ specifies that anyone with a GH

Hi Andrew and all, I do hope we can start the public reviews tomorrow, although there is still some question (apparently rule interpretations are involved) about how to handle the public comment

Hello Paul, Great, let's start the public review tomorrow then. Thank you for all the hard work! I am assuming Jim is also onboard given that we found a way forward without any delays. Also, nice to

Hi all, Sounds like a good resolution here. Just a couple of clarifications: - I have no objections to any of the changes (in

I'm ok with the proposal. Best regards, Axel

Thank you, Chet! -- Cheers, Andrew

Correct. I agreed that the changes are non-material. I just didn't take the time to think through the implications of how to handle that in the ballot. Andrew, what I mean is that the current PS01

Hello Chet, I am happy with the plan, sounds like a good way to kill two birds with one stone, esp. if some non-material changes will be requested during the review and we will need to make minor

I though Paul was ok with these changes. Can we verify? -----oslc-op-pgb@... wrote: ----- To: "oslc-op-pgb@..." <oslc-op-pgb@...> From: "Andrii Berezovskyi" Sent by: oslc-op-pgb@... Date: 03/08/2021

Hi guys - Sorry. Paul is right. I goofed on the ballot but here is an alternative way forward. I should not have used the link to the email attachment -

Hello Andrew, I agree with whatever you think is the best. Best regards, Axel

Hello Axel, Jim, The CM COS is proceeding as usual but the RM COS is in a bit of a trouble as Paul is not comfortable with the changes I made to RM PS. If we want the changes to be applied, we need a

Submitted on Friday, March 5, 2021 - 23:29 Submitted by user: censign Submitted values are: Your name: Chet Ensign TC name: OSLC Open Project TC email address:

Submitted on Friday, March 5, 2021 - 23:27 Submitted by user: censign Submitted values are: Your name: Chet Ensign TC name: OSLC Open Project TC email address:

Thank you Chet, Just cast my votes. -- Cheers, Andrew