+1 To September 1st and at least every 3 months after. Also, make sure to
label issues as blocker. That way, we'll know exactly what issues need to
be resolved and when.

Tyler
On Aug 7, 2014 3:45 PM, "Verma, Rishi (398J)" <[email protected]>
wrote:

> Thanks Sean - this is great.
>
> I'd suggest each of us get into JIRA and just make issues where
> appropriate. Some already have been logged (i.e. website work).
>
> Second, let's set a release date for 0.7 so we have a timeline to move
> forward with. We've almost got FM tests fixed and we now have an easier
> RADiX and Vagrant box for new users, so I'd suggest September 1st may be a
> good target (and every three months after that).
>
> Thoughts?
>
> Thanks,
> Rishi
>
> On Aug 7, 2014, at 1:52 PM, Tom Barber wrote:
>
> > Volunteers are useful, but also breaking the issues down into chunks and
> prioritizing the various tasks as well
> >
> > Tom
> >
> > On 07/08/14 21:47, Lewis John Mcgibbney wrote:
> >> Next step...
> >> Volunteering to take actions.
> >> Thank you Sean for posting, thisis extremely helpful.
> >> Lewis
> >>
> >>
> >> On Thu, Aug 7, 2014 at 1:44 PM, <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Folks:
> >>>
> >>> Thanks for dialing into the OODT Roadmap Telecon.
> >>>
> >>> The attendees were:
> >>>
> >>> - Tom Barber, UK business intelligence consultant
> >>> - Roger Carter, JPL intern
> >>> - Cameron Goodale, JPL
> >>> - Michael Joyce, JPL
> >>> - Sean Kelly, consultant
> >>> - Ross Laidlaw, JPL intern
> >>> - Lewis John McGibbney, JPL
> >>> - Tyler Palsulich, JPL intern
> >>> - Rishi Verma, JPL
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Here are the milestones that I recorded from the telecon, presented in
> no
> >>> particular order:
> >>>
> >>> A. Stability to the codebase.  Tests must pass before we can reliably
> move
> >>> forward.  This is especially troublesome since there are new features
> we do
> >>> want to implement, yet our confidence level of not breaking existing
> >>> function is low since the tests just don't work.
> >>>
> >>> B. Upgrade OODT's outdated components.  A number of parts within OODT
> has
> >>> ossified and become brittle (XML parsing, for example).  As the (mainly
> >>> Java) ecosystem has matured, these components have not, and they
> continue
> >>> to be "software hangnails".
> >>>
> >>> C. End-to-end story-driven testing.  While we'd love to see more and
> more
> >>> unit testing, complete integration testing is also vital.  OODT is a
> large
> >>> and complex system, and ensuring all the parts work in a story-driven
> >>> manner is important.
> >>>
> >>> D. Changing 5 to 10 config files to get OODT just to work is terrible.
> >>>  And worse, they're largely XML configuration files.  OODT needs to
> >>> get-up-and-go out-of-the-box.
> >>>
> >>> E. Documentation and website movement to Apache CMS-based tech.  The
> >>> static nature of the OODT website is a barrier to updates.  We'd like
> for
> >>> updates to frequent and timely.
> >>>
> >>> F. Make OODT more of a product, less of an architecture.  It's
> difficult
> >>> for new users to approach OODT since it's presented mainly as a
> software
> >>> architecture that has some software.  If we could change it into a
> product
> >>> (by providing sensible defaults, IoC, etc.) it could have a lower
> barrier
> >>> of entry.
> >>>
> >>> G. Remove PHP. OODT requires a Java servlet container for its core
> >>> function, so why bring in yet another technology for the Balance
> >>> components?  This increases the exploitable surface of an OODT server
> as
> >>> well as making adoption of OODT trickier.
> >>>
> >>> H. XML specification and/or schema so you can know what can be where.
>  For
> >>> these XML configuration files, the lack of a schema means it's
> difficult to
> >>> tell what elements and attributes go where, which are required, which
> are
> >>> optional, etc.  With a schema (and an XML-aware editor) this becomes
> easier
> >>> to do—and gives validation-before-run as a bonus.
> >>>
> >>> I. Where and what are the extension points?  This needs to be clearly
> >>> documented and highlighted.
> >>>
> >>> J. Tutorials are static and don't allow for community updates.  We need
> >>> them on the wiki instead so everyone can help.  Leave a "getting
> started"
> >>> tutorial on the main website, but move everything else to the Apache
> >>> Confluence wiki.
> >>>
> >>> K. Put Jenkins build status on the OODT website!
> >>>
> >>> L. Videos (screencasts).  But keep them upbeat.  Edit them carefully so
> >>> users aren't watching slow typists backspacing over mistakes
> repeatedly.
> >>>
> >>> M. Regular release cycle.  Four times a year.  This gives "liveness" to
> >>> the project, but also gives confidence to new users knowing that a
> certain
> >>> bug or new feature will be addressed in an upcoming release.
> >>>
> >>> O. Report list subscription numbers in board reports, not # of
> messages.
> >>>  This is a more interesting metric since it demonstrates the breadth of
> >>> OODT adoption, which is orthogonal to the amount of discussion which
> can be
> >>> dominated by one or two members.
> >>>
> >>> What milestones did I miss?  Do these sound correct?  Please reply to
> the
> >>> list and let's discuss further.  Once we've hammered out this list, we
> >>> should then priortize them.
> >>>
> >>> Thanks again for your participation,
> >>> --k
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> Sean Kelly
> >>> Vice President, Apache OODT
> >>> Member, Apache Software Foundation
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >
> >
> > --
> > *Tom Barber* | Technical Director
> >
> > meteorite bi
> > *T:* +44 20 8133 3730
> > *W:* www.meteorite.bi | *Skype:* meteorite.consulting
> > *A:* Surrey Technology Centre, Surrey Research Park, Guildford, GU2 7YG,
> UK
>
>

Reply via email to