Notice: this Wiki will be going read only early in 2024 and edits will no longer be possible. Please see: https://gitlab.eclipse.org/eclipsefdn/helpdesk/-/wikis/Wiki-shutdown-plan for the plan.
Difference between revisions of "COSMOS SDD Minutes 19FEB08"
(New page: == Logistics == * Date: 19FEB08 * Time: 9AM EST * Attendees: Julia McCarthy, Chris Middlebrandt, Julie Holloway, Charlie Halloran, Mark McCraw, Robert DeMason, Merri Jensen, Josh Hester, J...) |
(Initial content) |
||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
* Time: 9AM EST | * Time: 9AM EST | ||
* Attendees: Julia McCarthy, Chris Middlebrandt, Julie Holloway, Charlie Halloran, Mark McCraw, Robert DeMason, Merri Jensen, Josh Hester, Jason Losh, Mark Weitzel, Michael Scharf | * Attendees: Julia McCarthy, Chris Middlebrandt, Julie Holloway, Charlie Halloran, Mark McCraw, Robert DeMason, Merri Jensen, Josh Hester, Jason Losh, Mark Weitzel, Michael Scharf | ||
| + | |||
| + | == Agenda == | ||
| + | |||
| + | # Review minutes from last week | ||
| + | # Update on tooling use case entry | ||
| + | #* Enhancement requests entered | ||
| + | # P2 Deep Dive Meeting Summary | ||
| + | #* Jason, Mark, Charlie to summarize P2 runtime meeting | ||
| + | # Identify SDD deliverables for COSMOS 1.0 | ||
| + | #* Tools | ||
| + | #* Runtime | ||
| + | #* Repository | ||
| + | # Tentative: continue use case review | ||
| + | #* Focus on deployment end user use cases | ||
| + | # Follow-up on action items | ||
| + | #* Charlie/Chris, continue working w/ IBM legal on committing BTG code | ||
| + | #* Josh, Mark M., Chris to start entering formal tooling use cases | ||
| + | #* Charlie, Mark M., Jason, to discuss P2 and setup deep dive meeting on P2 | ||
| + | #* Charlie, Mark W., Jason, to discuss code commit process | ||
| + | |||
| + | == Minutes == | ||
| + | |||
| + | # Tooling use cases and enhancement requests from IBM have been entered, SAS needs to reformat their tooling use cases and enter their enhancement requests still. | ||
| + | #* Target due date: today or tomorrow (2/19, 2/20) | ||
| + | # Charlie still working through IBM legal to get approvals for end user use cases. | ||
| + | # P2 Meeting Summary - [[Equinox_p2]] | ||
| + | #* There are several terminology conflicts (for example, IU and artifact are separate in P2, but not in SDD). | ||
| + | #* Their IU is an xml file but it is very simplistic, there is no schema defined. | ||
| + | #* It will most likely require a significant amount of work to make P2 process an SDD. | ||
| + | #* Mark W. asks if we have created a decision matrix for which technology to use for the Runtime and for the CL1 vs CL2 non-functional requirements. | ||
| + | #** TPM folks at IBM didn't like Java and Mark W. said that part of him felt that we go w/ P2. | ||
| + | #** Suggested that we start with a wiki entry and Charlie can circulate back to IBM. | ||
| + | #* If we base on P2, we should clearly state that so that the P2 team will know. Then we would do the coding work and attach it as a patch/ER, and they would then accept it as a contribution -or- we could put the code in COSMOS as an extension. | ||
| + | #* What happens if our patches/ER's outpace the actual P2 framework? | ||
| + | #** We want to ensure the success of P2, they won't want to take extensions if it risks their success, so we would keep patches to the framework to a minimum. We would just have to keep communication with the P2 team open and negiotiate with them (so everything we need is still on the table). | ||
| + | #* Mark M., Jeff, & Jason to publish their P2 deep-dive findings onto wiki. | ||
| + | # Michael asks if we have looked into Maynstall or Eclipse Packaging Project. | ||
| + | #* [[Maynstall]] wiki | ||
| + | #* [http://www.eclipse.org/maynstall Maynstall] | ||
| + | #* [http://www.eclipse.org/epp Eclipse Packaging Project] | ||
| + | #* [http://www.eclipse.org/equinox/framework/ Equinox Framework] | ||
| + | # What do we think we are going to be able to deliver with COSMOS 1.0 (i10) [tools, runtime, & repo] | ||
| + | #* configuration management reporting | ||
| + | #* integrating with repo | ||
| + | #* we should create a new page | ||
| + | #* Ali & David are the SML & XML repo experts on COSMOS | ||
| + | #** [[Resource_Modeling_use_cases]] | ||
| + | #** [http://www.eclipse.org/cosmos/resource_modeling/documents/design/arch_cosmos_resource_modeling.php COSMOS Resource Modeling] | ||
| + | #* Julia is looking into the interchange format (which is like the old media descriptor from IUDD days) | ||
| + | #* SDD Programmatic Interface (SPI) & validator should be tooling contributions | ||
| + | # Change Analyzer | ||
| + | #* Julia to send design docs to Charlie who will determine if the legal agreements with SAS cover this. | ||
| + | #* Basically, any code over 200 lines has to go through special IBM legal process. Charlie is lumping the BTG, SPI, and validator as one code contribution, and the Change Analyzer as a separate contribution. | ||
| + | # We skipped the deployment use cases, Charlie still working with IBM legal, so we'll keep this as a tentative agenda item for next week. | ||
| + | # Committer vote has already started for Jason, Julie is still pending. | ||
| + | #* As of 2/22/08, Jason has been approved for committer status. | ||
| + | |||
| + | == Action Items == | ||
| + | |||
| + | # Charlie/Chris/Julie, continue working w/ IBM legal on committing BTG code, Charlie to send status. | ||
| + | # Josh & Mark M. to continue work entering formal tooling use cases and Enhancement Requests. | ||
| + | # Mark M., Jeff, & Jason to create wiki page for P2 findings. | ||
| + | # Create Decision Matrix wiki page for implementation technology and for CL1 vs CL2 non-functional requirements. (Owner?) | ||
| + | # Look into additional projects that Michael mentioned, links are provided in the Minutes section above. | ||
| + | # Julia to send Charlie Change Analyzer design doc, Charlie to engage IBM legal about contributing code. | ||
| + | # Mark W. to answer outstanding questions on generated code for BTG and proposed repo structure and package naming conventions. | ||
| + | # Mark W. to move forward with vote for Julie and Jason as code committers with COSMOS. | ||
Latest revision as of 13:11, 22 February 2008
Contents
Logistics
- Date: 19FEB08
- Time: 9AM EST
- Attendees: Julia McCarthy, Chris Middlebrandt, Julie Holloway, Charlie Halloran, Mark McCraw, Robert DeMason, Merri Jensen, Josh Hester, Jason Losh, Mark Weitzel, Michael Scharf
Agenda
- Review minutes from last week
- Update on tooling use case entry
- Enhancement requests entered
- P2 Deep Dive Meeting Summary
- Jason, Mark, Charlie to summarize P2 runtime meeting
- Identify SDD deliverables for COSMOS 1.0
- Tools
- Runtime
- Repository
- Tentative: continue use case review
- Focus on deployment end user use cases
- Follow-up on action items
- Charlie/Chris, continue working w/ IBM legal on committing BTG code
- Josh, Mark M., Chris to start entering formal tooling use cases
- Charlie, Mark M., Jason, to discuss P2 and setup deep dive meeting on P2
- Charlie, Mark W., Jason, to discuss code commit process
Minutes
- Tooling use cases and enhancement requests from IBM have been entered, SAS needs to reformat their tooling use cases and enter their enhancement requests still.
- Target due date: today or tomorrow (2/19, 2/20)
- Charlie still working through IBM legal to get approvals for end user use cases.
- P2 Meeting Summary - Equinox_p2
- There are several terminology conflicts (for example, IU and artifact are separate in P2, but not in SDD).
- Their IU is an xml file but it is very simplistic, there is no schema defined.
- It will most likely require a significant amount of work to make P2 process an SDD.
- Mark W. asks if we have created a decision matrix for which technology to use for the Runtime and for the CL1 vs CL2 non-functional requirements.
- TPM folks at IBM didn't like Java and Mark W. said that part of him felt that we go w/ P2.
- Suggested that we start with a wiki entry and Charlie can circulate back to IBM.
- If we base on P2, we should clearly state that so that the P2 team will know. Then we would do the coding work and attach it as a patch/ER, and they would then accept it as a contribution -or- we could put the code in COSMOS as an extension.
- What happens if our patches/ER's outpace the actual P2 framework?
- We want to ensure the success of P2, they won't want to take extensions if it risks their success, so we would keep patches to the framework to a minimum. We would just have to keep communication with the P2 team open and negiotiate with them (so everything we need is still on the table).
- Mark M., Jeff, & Jason to publish their P2 deep-dive findings onto wiki.
- Michael asks if we have looked into Maynstall or Eclipse Packaging Project.
- What do we think we are going to be able to deliver with COSMOS 1.0 (i10) [tools, runtime, & repo]
- configuration management reporting
- integrating with repo
- we should create a new page
- Ali & David are the SML & XML repo experts on COSMOS
- Julia is looking into the interchange format (which is like the old media descriptor from IUDD days)
- SDD Programmatic Interface (SPI) & validator should be tooling contributions
- Change Analyzer
- Julia to send design docs to Charlie who will determine if the legal agreements with SAS cover this.
- Basically, any code over 200 lines has to go through special IBM legal process. Charlie is lumping the BTG, SPI, and validator as one code contribution, and the Change Analyzer as a separate contribution.
- We skipped the deployment use cases, Charlie still working with IBM legal, so we'll keep this as a tentative agenda item for next week.
- Committer vote has already started for Jason, Julie is still pending.
- As of 2/22/08, Jason has been approved for committer status.
Action Items
- Charlie/Chris/Julie, continue working w/ IBM legal on committing BTG code, Charlie to send status.
- Josh & Mark M. to continue work entering formal tooling use cases and Enhancement Requests.
- Mark M., Jeff, & Jason to create wiki page for P2 findings.
- Create Decision Matrix wiki page for implementation technology and for CL1 vs CL2 non-functional requirements. (Owner?)
- Look into additional projects that Michael mentioned, links are provided in the Minutes section above.
- Julia to send Charlie Change Analyzer design doc, Charlie to engage IBM legal about contributing code.
- Mark W. to answer outstanding questions on generated code for BTG and proposed repo structure and package naming conventions.
- Mark W. to move forward with vote for Julie and Jason as code committers with COSMOS.