[Os-project-managers] Fork in the Road

[Horand Gassmann]

Kipp Martin <kmartin at chicagobooth.edu> wrote:

> Hi Gus:
>
>> I think we are constitutionally obligated to call the root element in an
>> OSrL file <osrl> and similarly for <osol> in an OSoL file. It would be a
>> mistake to do away entirely with the OSoL and OSrL schemas.
>
> Absolutely! I totally agree! Perhaps I miscommunicated. I want OSrL  
> to be the solver result and OSoL to the solver options. I want to  
> PUT BACK into OSpL what we took out. So for example, I do not want  
> OSoL to have a tag <solverToInvoke>.  I do not want OSrL with  
> elements for things like <totalJobsSoFar> -- that is system stuff  
> and goes back into OSpL. I want OSoL and OSrL for the what they were  
> first intended.
>>
>> If we want to work with the idea of header and data, this then would
>> look like this:
>>
>> <osrl>
>> <resultHeader>
>> ... (the header information we currently have...
>
> Here is where we differ -- if we put in the information we currently  
> have we have the same old, same old problem, namely some information  
> is for the solver server and some is for the solver.  Here is what I  
> am objecting to so strongly -- having either OSoL or OSrL with tags  
> that get read by BOTH the solver server and the solver.

I am just re-reading this. I am not sure I understand the objection  
about server and solver both _reading_ something. Is there any hint  
that they indeed both _act_ on the information they read? If so, then  
yes, I agree there is a problem -- at least potentially. But if they  
just read it, what possible harm can come from that?

Cheers

gus