060410 AnnArbor

From GEANT2-JRA1 Wiki

AGENDA - Decisions/Actions

Contents

[edit]

Monday

perfSONAR development week

  • Time: 09:00 – 18:00
  • Attendees
    • Loukik Kudamaroti (DANTE)
    • Jason Zuraswski (UDel)
    • Nicolas Simar (DANTE)
    • Fausto Vetter (RNP)
    • Jeff Boote (Internet2)
    • Eric Boyd (Internet2)
    • Susan Evett (Internet2)
    • Steve Corbato (Internet2)
    • Verena Venus(DFN)
    • Roland Kausch (DFN)
    • Luís Marta (FCCN)
    • David Schmitz (DFN-Munich)
    • Andreas Hannaman (DFN-Munich)
    • Matt Zekauskas (Internet2)
    • Maciej Glowiak (PSNC)
    • Ulisses Alonso (Red-IRIS)
    • Warren Matthews (GA Tech)
    • Joe Metzger (ESnet)
    • Jerome Durand (Renater)
  • Agenda: Code Quality, AuthN/Z
  • Time: 0900-1300
    1. Introductions (all)
    2. Welcome (Steve)
    3. Expectations (all)
    4. Tool integrators and visualisation developpers to comment on their experience and express their expectations. (David S)
    5. Strategy to strengthen of the actual code - rather than adding new features (?)
      • pieces re-usable between services - rather than re-developing them (?)
      • code reviews/ unit testing - what progress has been made, what still needs to be done (?)
      • deployability of services - what progress has been made, what still needs to be done (?)
  • Time: 1400-1800
    1. Error codes
      Current list of codes, status of exception handlers, discussion of readiness to use the current list of codes. (Maciej)
    2. Status report of JRA-5 AuthN/AuthZ interaction (Maurizio or Jeff)
  • Time: As available - break-out
    • Steering Group to discuss 'wanted' features/developments for the next quarter
    • Developers to interact in small groups or one on one about specific issues
    • Documentation team to discuss current status of documents and needs
    • Release Management team to run off for beer
  • Decisions
    • General goal for everyone is to reduce the size of all configuration files to ease deployment issues.
    • General consensus that immediate 'core' developer attention should be focused on strengthening code vs. adding new features.
  • Actions
    • Break-out: Diagnose problem from application perspective. (done - David,Jason,Verena)
    • Add schema example-instance to demonstrate the use of response codes (done - Jason)
      • Complete: StatusCode-Resp1.xml
    • Add page to wiki to allow perfSONAR clients to register interest in the project and notify the project about what they are doing. This will allow coordination of effort and also allow current developers to see the impact of their developments. (?? - Jason/Andreas)
    • Break-out: Versioning of Marshalling classes (done? - Jason,Jeff,Loukik)
    • Redesign of Message Handler level (15 May - Jeff)
      • Example using new Message Handler style (31 May - Jeff,Fausto)
    • Developer Documentation (15 May - Loukik)
    • Error code cleanup in Marshalling (5 May - Jason)
    • LS accessPoint needs to be changed from a primary key (15 May - Maciej)
    • Exception Handling in services modified to use response codes (31 May - Loukik,Roman,Maciej,Jeff,Fausto,...)
    • Bugzilla support (15 May - Maciej,Jeff,Jason)
      • Already installed, will work on configuring by 15 may.
[edit]

Tuesday

perfSONAR development week

  • Time: 09:00 – 18:00
  • Attendees
    • Loukik Kudamaroti (DANTE)
    • Martin Swany (UDel)
    • Jason Zuraswski (UDel)
    • Nicolas Simar (DANTE)
    • Fausto Vetter (RNP)
    • Jeff Boote (Internet2)
    • Eric Boyd (Internet2)
    • Susan Evett (Internet2)
    • Verena Venus(DFN)
    • Roland Kausch (DFN)
    • Luís Marta (FCCN)
    • David Schmitz (DFN-Munich)
    • Andreas Hannaman (DFN-Munich)
    • Matt Zekauskas (Internet2)
    • Maciej Glowiak (PSNC)
    • Ulisses Alonso (Red-IRIS)
    • Warren Matthews (GA Tech)
    • Joe Metzger (ESnet)
    • Jerome Durand (Renater)
  • Agenda: Morning - Services/ Afternoon - LS Services
  • Time: 0900-1300
    1. MA and MP Services
      • MP's
        What's available, what's planned. Let's not have multiple groups working on the same thing if we can help it.
        Who is running which services, who can access those tools. How useful is it?
        What are the barriers to adoption, what can we do about them?
      • RRD-MA - Deployment Status
        Who is running it, who can access those stores. How useful is it?
        What are the barriers to adoption, what can we do about them?
  • Time: 1400-1800
    1. LS
      • Current Status
        1. Registration
          What services are configured to register with the LS?
          What functionality is still missing for the single-domain case? (If any.)
          Can tools look at the LS to determine 'active' vs. 'non-active' services?
        2. Deployment Status
        Who is running it, who can access those stores. How useful is it?
        What are the barriers to adoption, what can we do about them?
      • Multi-Domain LS
        1. Current Plans
          • Track 1
            Simple steps to multi-domain
          • Track 2 (Paper writing party on Friday for this - ground work will already be done)
            Research paper to SC, trying more interesting things. If it works, bring it back into perfSONAR main-line. Otherwise, it was fun.
  • Time: As available - break-out
    • Steering Group to discuss 'wanted' features/developments for the next quarter
    • Developers to interact in small groups or one on one about specific issues
    • Documentation team to discuss current status of documents and needs
    • Release Management team to run off for beer
  • Decisions
    • Project Objectives
      • Timely (funding cycles, dependencies with other developements, project deadlines)
      • Functionality (features)
      • Quality (testable, bug "free")
      • Adoptable (Ease of use by the people who have to deploy and/or integrate the changes)
      • Extensible
      • Modular
    • Proposals for change will be evaluated using the following process:
      1. Make sure everyone understands the proposal (including alternatives)
      2. Is this change for the better? (Take into account Project Objectives.)
      3. What is required to implement it?
      4. Is it worthwhile given the trade-off between 2 and 3.
  • Actions
[edit]

Wednesday

perfSONAR development week

  • Time: 08:00 – 18:00
  • Attendees
    • Loukik Kudamaroti (DANTE)
    • Martin Swany (UDel)
    • Jason Zuraswski (UDel)
    • Nicolas Simar (DANTE)
    • Fausto Vetter (RNP)
    • Jeff Boote (Internet2)
    • Eric Boyd (Internet2)
    • Susan Evett (Internet2)
    • Verena Venus(DFN)
    • Roland Kausch (DFN)
    • Luís Marta (FCCN)
    • David Schmitz (DFN-Munich)
    • Matt Zekauskas (Internet2)
    • Maciej Glowiak (PSNC)
    • Ulisses Alonso (Red-IRIS)
    • Warren Matthews (GA Tech)
    • Joe Metzger (ESnet)
    • Jerome Durand (Renater)
  • Agenda: Morning - Release Management Meeting/ Afternoon - Release building and developer concerns, Dissemination
  • Time: 0800-1200
    1. Release Management Meeting
      • Finalise the licensing
      • Team Selection Process (Steering Group, Documentation Team, etc...)
      • Charter - what should the steering group be doing (vision for future functionality)
        1. How are decisions made. Need to compromise on:
          • time
          • functionality
          • quality
      • Develop Roadmap
      • Decide upon next release timing.
  • Time: 1300-1800
    1. Release Building - Developer concerns
      • Code Structure
      • remove 'sonar' from path components
      • CVS Structual issues with affect release process (LK)
      • Ant release targets - what packages/products do we want to offer? (JB)
      • (jars)
    2. Dissemination
      • Version Numbers for 'generic service' (utilities)
      • Start a common set of slides for tutorials on perfSONAR (objective, definitions, content)
      • Tag line and work description
    3. Release Management
      • How is it working? How can it be improved?
        • CVS Structual issues which affect release process (LK)
      • When should the next release happen? (Need input from Steering Group road-map.)
    4. NMWG unmarshalling/marshalling logging and exceptions
    5. Bugzilla
  • Time: As available - break-out
    • Steering Group to discuss 'wanted' features/developments for the next quarter
    • Developers to interact in small groups or one on one about specific issues
    • Documentation team to discuss current status of documents and needs
    • Release Management team to run off for beer
  • Decisions
    • Proposed Steering Group:
      • Nicolas,Eric,Joe,Szymon,Jeff,Martin,Luis,Roman,Andreas,Vedrin,Jerome,Loukik,Verena
    • Proposed Release Engineering Team:
      • Luis,Jeff,Jason,Roman(for current build scripts)
    • Proposed Documentation Team
      • Susan,Jerome,Verena,Luis,Jason(schema)
  • Actions
    • Proposed Steering Group list sent to list with request for feedback (?? - Nicolas?)
    • Flywheel needs to be selected for each Group (?? - Nicolas?)
    • NMWG classes will be modified to use a passed in log4j object for logging (31 May - Jason)
    • All 'sonar' directories will be removed from the repository (after June 1 - Jeff)
      • Once this is complete others will need to help with testing
    • Proposal for new directory hierarchy to be implemented AFTER June 1st (1 June - Loukik)
[edit]

Thursday

perfSONAR development week

  • Time: 09:00 – 18:00
  • Attendees
    • Loukik Kudamaroti (DANTE)
    • Martin Swany (UDel)
    • Jason Zuraswski (UDel)
    • Nicolas Simar (DANTE)
    • Fausto Vetter (RNP)
    • Jeff Boote (Internet2)
    • Eric Boyd (Internet2)
    • Susan Evett (Internet2)
    • Verena Venus(DFN)
    • Roland Kausch (DFN)
    • David Schmitz (DFN-Munich)
    • Andreas Hannaman (DFN-Munich)
    • Matt Zekauskas (Internet2)
    • Maciej Glowiak (PSNC)
    • Ulisses Alonso (Red-IRIS)
    • Warren Matthews (GA Tech)
    • Joe Metzger (ESnet)
  • Agenda: Morning - Interfaces/ Afternoon - overflow
  • Time: 0900-1300
    1. Schema
      • Stability - what clients (UI etc) can/should expect (?)
        1. Versioning - convention (?)
        2. Define schema update process - and how it relatese to release management (?)
          How do we use the versioning capabilities of the schema to actually accomplish interface stability for clients?
      • Recent Updates/Issues
        1. L2 schema (MS)
        2. Topology database issues - what does it mean for the schema? (?)
        3. EventType name spaces for values
          Do we want to create a BCP for EventType values? This space needs to be managed for growth so that new EventTypes values don't conflict. ('Select' is very generic.)
    2. API (Java reference implementation)
      • Can more re-use reasonably be accomplished
        • If so, which classes/interfaces need to be stabalized for future development
        • If not, which classes/interfaces are currently most problematic
    3. Roadmap for features beyond the next release
  • Time: 1400-1800 (Things skipped earlier in the week, and additional topics brought up)
    1. Data Push (LK)
    2. Team Building
      • Negative/Positive points (NS)
      • perfSONAR strength and weaknesses (code and work) How to improve?
    3. Documentation for new service developers (LK)
  • Time: As available - break-out
    • Steering Group to discuss 'wanted' features/developments for the next quarter
    • Developers to interact in small groups or one on one about specific issues
    • Documentation team to discuss current status of documents and needs
    • Release Management team to run off for beer
  • Decisions
    • Each service should publish 3 pieces of information about itself
      • Package Release Version, Component Version, Schema Version
      • It has not yet been decided if this should be as part of a single version string, or if individual attributes should be supported by the LS.
    • Service configuration should be done using an xml file instead of *.properties files.
      • Can use the same parsing code that is being used for other services, and gives us the ability to store configuration information in an xml database providing the potential for centralized configuration this way.
    • EventType values should have well structured names to avoid name collisions. Specifically, the value should match the namespace of the subject (Defined by NMWG).
  • Actions
    • Create an example schema file for psService:Subject as the first configuration data that is added this way. (Need to get it working for the SC paper anyway.) (20 Apr - Jason,Martin,Maciej)
    • Use the example from above to configure the CLMP (31 May - Fausto,Jeff)
    • Determine if namespace query problem is inherent to XPath or exist (15 May - Martin,Jason,Maciej)
[edit]

Friday

perfSONAR development week

  • Time: 09:00 – 18:00
  • Attendees
    • Martin Swany (UDel)
    • Jason Zuraswski (UDel)
    • Fausto Vetter (RNP)
    • Jeff Boote (Internet2)
    • Eric Boyd (Internet2)
    • Verena Venus(DFN)
    • Roland Kausch (DFN)
    • David Schmitz (DFN-Munich)
    • Maciej Glowiak (PSNC)
    • Joe Metzger (ESnet)
  • Agenda: Things skipped earlier in the week, and additional topics brought up
    (It is expected that many people will be leaving this day, but for those that are staying and want to work...)
  • Time: 0900-1800
    1. Agenda to be named later
  • Time: 0900-1500
    1. SC06 paper on Multi-Domain LS
  • Time: As available - break-out
    • Steering Group to discuss 'wanted' features/developments for the next quarter
    • Developers to interact in small groups or one on one about specific issues
    • Documentation team to discuss current status of documents and needs
    • Release Management team to run off for beer
  • Actions
Retrieved from "http://wiki.perfsonar.net/jra1-wiki/index.php/060410_AnnArbor"
Personal tools