2008-11-24 Conference Call

Owned by Benn Oshrin
Last updated: Feb 13, 2009 by SusanBramhallVersion comment

Logistics

Time: Nov 24 2008, 10:30am
Conference Bridge: 218-486-7200 #167964

Attendees

Agenda

  1. Select regular monthly meeting time
  2. Meeting with uPortal to bring up to date on roadmap
  3. Development Processes (follow up from Community call)
  4. Review of JASIG Incubation Working Group Proposal
  5. How to get more people to contribute, given how large the community is
    1. Activities we should be doing to encourage more feedback
    2. Outreach
      1. eg: Please implement X since you've already done your own extension
        1. Model to figure out how to turn unknown contributors into core developers by building their credibility with non-core initial contributions
        2. See also Development Processes
    3. Sponsorships (money could be used to hire programmers)
  6. Roadmap prioritization and wordsmithing
    1. Groups to be charged with
      1. CAS 4 Architecture/Protocol (or determination that current architecture is sufficient)
      2. Monitoring and Metrics
      3. Configuration and Deployment Management
      4. Documentation and Translations

Notes

  1. Regular scheduling for 4th Monday at 10:30 - 11:30 am, starting in January.
    1. Reserve right to schedule one in December
    2. For January agenda: approval of development process and JASIG "owning" protocol
  2. We have not yet met with uPortal to discuss the CAS roadmap (originally scheduled for Madison)
  3. Discussion of development process as follow-up from community call
    1. Initial draft of development process and contrib by mid-December
    2. Close for Comment January 9th
    3. Approve at January steering committee call
  4. Review of Incubation Process - old
    1. If stuff comes to the steering committee instead of the incubation working group, does it need to go back to the incubation working group to start the process? This shouldn't need to happen if the issue was destined for the steering committee anyway.
    2. What if a proposal applies to two steering committees (eg: CAS and uPortal)? Perhaps the steering committees work out ownership otherwise escalate to the board.
  5. Discussion of encouraging contributions to the Project
    1. We are currently identifying smaller pieces that people can volunteer for
    2. Scott is doing outreach as CAS4 work continues
    3. The roadmap should indicate who has committed to doing what work
    4. Potential sponsorship models
      1. Pay Per Feature
        1. Feature x requires _y_hours @ $z/hour
        2. Work is implemented by CAS committers or their delegates (e.g.: student employees)
        3. Sponsorship of a feature would imply a commitment for that feature to be included as part of the product, except perhaps in edge cases where it makes sense to be distributed separately
      2. Add a Feature
        1. Use your own staff to implement feature x
        2. There is no commitment for inclusion into the product, work will be considered as per community contribution guidelines
        3. Early coordination with CAS committers is encouraged to increase the likelihood of acceptance
      3. Google Summer of Code
        1. Need to review Google's potentially sketchy dual licensing (if they still do this)
      4. Grant funding
        1. Can be difficult to obtain, no immediate viable options
      5. Unicon cooperative support
        1. They are interested but have not yet found a viable financial model
      6. CAS steering committee should have oversight of any process
  6. CAS 4 Roadmap updates
    1. Still need to sort roadmap items into the four groups identified in Madison and attach primary persons to each
    2. Architecture needs to happen first
    3. Working groups to be charged with requirements gathering and prioritization
  7. Sacramento State requested an update on the status of clear text password passback
    1. Can't answer until the new architecture is ready
    2. There is still an open question as to whether there should be an "official" way of doing this
      1. And if so whether we should use the Unicon implementation
    3. This issue could be used as a test of the proposed development process
  8. Call for December?
    1. Leave on calendar, decide the week before

Action Items

  • Benn and Scott: Update uPortal Steering Committee on Roadmap (via email) (tick)
  • Benn: Set Community Calls (week before Steering Committee calls?)
  • Benn: Take comments on the incubation process back to the incubation working group.
  • Scott: Add a column to the roadmap indicating who has committed to doing what
  • Jonathan: Follow up with John Lewis regarding the likelihood of Unicon adding CAS to their cooperative support model
  • Scott: Sort roadmap items into the four groups identified in the agenda and find leads for each
  • New Working Groups: Begin requirements gathering and prior decision
  • ?: Propose clear text password feature as test of new development process