Closed jhdalek55 closed 1 year ago
Note any text developed for this section should probably reference any new text drafted to address Issue #136 .
Can we determine if any changes here are needed?
At the 9/27 Standards meeting, the following changes were requested:
Change the section title to "ECUs without sufficient storage" Remove the last few sentences starting from the word "However,..."
Opened PR# 138 on Deployment Best Practices to make the changes listed above.
This will be removed if and when PR #138 is approved
Deleted with the merger of PR #138
The text devoted to working with ECUs Without Secondary Storage in Deployment Best Practices needs another look. Recent discussions on how such ECUs handle verifications tell us that we are not clearly addressing community questions about this topic. What specifically do we need to add or remove about this topic as written at https://github.com/uptane/deployment-considerations/blob/master/ecus.md#ecus-without-secondary-storage to ensure we are realistically describing options for these types of ECUs.