I was thinking it would make sense to fill out the Graduation Maturity Assessment ( https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/TAVERNADEV/2016-03+Taverna+Graduation+Maturity+Assessment) and then evaluate where we think we are relative to graduation. Interestingly, at least the way I read the maturity assessment, it's geared more towards process and structure (also important) rather than released content - specifically, it doesn't mention how much of the code we want to release and doesn't mention soft goals, such as engagement.
Perhaps we should add something about released content to the assessment? Shall we plan to release the Server and evaluate engagement at that time (with an eye toward graduation) or do we think we need to release the Workbench as well? (Are we talking user engagement vs developer engagement?) I'd love to know what specific user functionality is added with the Server and what will not be available until we release the Workbench. Gale On Wed, Aug 10, 2016 at 7:56 AM Donal K. Fellows < [email protected]> wrote: > On 08/08/2016 20:31, Andy Seaborne wrote: > > What do others on the PPMC think? > [...] > >>> I remember we said the 3 most important points were > >>> > >>> 1. Community growth > >> > >> Taverna is like many ASF projects - the size of the active (I)PMC is not > >> that great. This, in my experience, is normal. We hear and see the ASF > >> mega-projects but in terms of numbers of projects, they are a minority. > >> > >> It would be good to see some of the IPMC active. The critical thing here > >> is whether people are available to get releases out, not "3 days, now" > >> but "in the next month could you...". > > At the moment, my workload is pretty high with other things going on, so > I can only occasionally pay proper attention here. I'm afraid I've been > relying on others to pick things up and let me know explicitly when my > input is desired, and that's a bit naughty of me. > > I'll parachute effort and attention in when I can. > > >>> 2. Release more of the imported code to create engagement > >> > >> What is the current state of imported/released? > > There are two main items out of the imported set that haven't yet made > it to release: the Server and the Workbench. With the Server, I think > the effort to release it isn't too massive, under the assumption that we > don't take on doing a huge functionality revision. While there's some > bits that need work, I'm guessing that it isn't too much unless we go > for some of the more elaborate ideas that we've mooted in the past (and > I'm not convinced any more that they're the right way). > > Concretely, the key things are: > > * Review the internal message bus mechanism for security. JRMP is > convenient, but it requires very tight security and isn't really > designed to work that way. Attention required and not just from me > because I'm probably too close to the existing code to see any dumb > problems in it. > > * Reworking the server so that it supports something less horrible > than baclava files for packaged data import and export. For export, > most people have been just downloading zip files, but the import > side is more of an issue. > > * Throw out the mess that was the listeners and the notification > mechanism. That never really worked right. The bits that did work > are already mostly partially elsewhere, but we ought to clear this > bit of swamp instead of keeping the alligators for ass-backward > compatibility reasons. > > Aside from the usual release engineering stuff (license checks, etc) of > course. > > The Workbench is a whole different problem. > > Donal. >
