According to Gregs mail if his Proposal will be accepted, this pages should 
also placed there :-) 
  
Nils

---
Nils Hendrik Birnbaum
IT-Consultant
Requirements Engineer 


Am 12.02.2012 um 19:46 schrieb Nils Hendrik Birnbaum:

> Hi Michelle, Kevin, List
> thanks for sharing your ideas. I took a look at them and merged them with 
> some restriction I know about.
> 
> So we have two important questions. where should we link it and where should 
> it live.
> 
> I took a look at the adopters page and recognize, that it's a subpage of "Get 
> involved". There I found Communication: http://opencast.org/communications. 
> 
> I would prefer to add wiki section on that page with some links to several 
> important parts of our wiki. We have a lot of instructing stud deep inside 
> our wiki that could be useful on that page. We can also link from adopters. 
> But in general we can link it from everywhere.
> 
> The pages should live in the wiki. That would make it a bit difficult. When 
> we put it in the release docs, we have to add them to trunk and all releases. 
> And we have to maintain all identical pages. Otherwise, after n releases we 
> would have n-1 outdates pages. So in my opinion we should create an own 
> section in the MHDOC-Wiki. Placing this section in the MH-Wiki would cause 
> issues with the navigation in jira.
> 
> In first step it could be useful to collect the various  configuration with a 
> form that we send on the list. Than I could add them to the wiki to get a 
> basic  setting. Later on the adopters could maintain them directly in the 
> wiki or send them by mail. Next step is, to create a wiki page to collect the 
> attributes on an installation that are interesting for an adopter.
> 
> Regards
> 
> Nils
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Am 11.02.2012 um 00:53 schrieb Kevin Chan:
> 
>> Hi Michelle,
>> 
>> I think the types of info for the capture agent needed would basically be a 
>> condensed version of what is on the Reference Hardware page:
>> http://opencast.jira.com/wiki/display/MHDOC/Reference+Hardware+V1.2
>> 
>> so it is probably too much info to simply tack on to the MH adopters pages. 
>> However, it would be useful to create a link from the adopters page to the 
>> capture agent pages used by each institution (though I am not sure how easy 
>> that might be!).
>> 
>> As for the content of the capture agent page, I see:
>> 
>> 1. What type/usage of agent (i.e., screencast only, SD video + screencast, 
>> HD video + screencast)? Total number of this agent in use.
>> 2. Hardware spec (basically something along the lines of the table for the 
>> Reference Hardware page)
>> 3. MH (or other) Config special to this setup
>> 4. Notes (i.e., we have tested running this agent at xxx bitrate and this 
>> uses xxx CPU power)
>> 
>> 5. [probably not all feasible to include at the start] Links/info on the 
>> institution and maybe other capture agent/server setup info
>> 
>> I think the above info would be a good start for a capture agent info 
>> template.
>> 
>> Kevin Chan
>> 
>> Operations Team
>> Educational Technology Services
>> UC Berkeley
>> 
>> 
>> On 2/10/12 6:30 AM, Michelle Ziegmann wrote:
>>> So we have this page: http://opencast.org/matterhorn-adopters, where 
>>> adopters identify themselves as such to the community and provide some 
>>> details about their implementation. It serves a good marketing purpose, but 
>>> the Matterhorn Deployment details could be expanded to meet the need you're 
>>> discussing here as well.
>>> 
>>> I'm preparing to make a call to those adopters on this list to update their 
>>> entries, and to the community for other adopters to add themselves. If you 
>>> all think this format could be useful for capturing and providing those 
>>> implementation details, I can first modify this form to enable it to 
>>> collect more information. What do you think? If you like the idea, what 
>>> fields/options would you suggest we add?
>>> 
>>> Or is the information you're seeking too detailed to put here?
>>> 
>>> Michelle
>>> 
>>> On 2/9/2012 4:18 PM, Kevin Chan wrote:
>>>> Hi all,
>>>> 
>>>> I think what Nils is proposing makes sense. Aside from 
>>>> separating/searching by "capture agent types" (screencast only, SD video + 
>>>> screencast, HD video + screencast, etc.), it is also useful to sort by (or 
>>>> provide a list of) institutions' capture agent setup.
>>>> 
>>>> For example, at UC Berkeley, we are likely going to have 3 different types 
>>>> of capture agents - screencast only, SD video + screencast, HD video + 
>>>> screencast - we would also provide additional "institutional" info on why 
>>>> we have these setups, contact info, links to real life MH distributions.
>>>> 
>>>> Admittedly, this approach works better for system wide applications (we 
>>>> are a large school with this many concurrent/peak users - here is our 
>>>> hardware setup), but I think having this view into how MH is actually 
>>>> being implemented would be useful.
>>>> 
>>>> Finally, we might even piggy back other MH setup info (like 
>>>> admin/worker/engage setup, storage setup, distribution channels) that 
>>>> would prove useful to other potential adopters.
>>>> 
>>>> Kevin Chan
>>>> 
>>>> Operations Team
>>>> Educational Technology Services
>>>> UC Berkeley
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> On 2/8/12 10:22 AM, Nils Hendrik Birnbaum wrote:
>>>>> Hey Folks,
>>>>> as I'm working a lot with our documentation I found pages the were at the 
>>>>> first glance outdated. Today when I came home from office reading some of 
>>>>> the mails around the CA dropped frames - hardware - whatever issues I got 
>>>>> the opinion that outdated is the wrong description - we wrote them from 
>>>>> the wrong point of view and we use terms we all know well but everybody 
>>>>> has his own understanding what he means. It's one of the major problems 
>>>>> in requirements engineering (RE). To illustrate it, please look at [1] 
>>>>> (german server, english texts). (This cartoon is an important element in 
>>>>> most of the RE certifications)
>>>>> 
>>>>> I would like to keep the example of the CA. And we should ask ourselves, 
>>>>> what are the information the adopter has in his mind when he goes to the 
>>>>> reference hardware page and what are the pitfalls we run into day by day.
>>>>> 
>>>>> In general he would say "I want to record lectures". In his mind he got 
>>>>> more specific ideas how this recording will join on and what the result 
>>>>> of the recording is. This thought will be affected for example by an 
>>>>> existing system that should be replaced, recordings he saw in the wild on 
>>>>> youtube or iTunes that could be recorded with Matterhorn or any other 
>>>>> system and so on.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Same with our day by day work. We talk about
>>>>> 
>>>>> *"successful recordings"  (Framerate, resolution, size, devices, ...)
>>>>> * Purchasable hardware (in North America, Europe, everywhere, ...)
>>>>> 
>>>>> So the language bites us (free translated by myself). We should talk more 
>>>>> precise, using a glossary ..
>>>>> 
>>>>> And my approach would be to create the landing page for our different 
>>>>> modules which bases on the adopters requirements. The first thing that 
>>>>> came into my mind is the quality of the video. That determines the 
>>>>> hardware specs so they can be grouped by 3 or 4 target qualities and the 
>>>>> adopter can watch examples and decide which hardware he needs.
>>>>> 
>>>>> This is an easy approach to safe time for answering questions on the 
>>>>> users list caused by different meaning.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Just my two cents and a small example, please give me some feedback for 
>>>>> kind of an e-mail brainstorming (I will nor answer this week to stay away 
>>>>> from a discussion, we could to this later on)
>>>>> 
>>>>> Regards
>>>>> Nils
>>>>> 
>>>>> [1] http://interface-gmbh.de/Anforderungen_WAS_aus_Pj_wurde.JPG
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Matterhorn mailing list
>>>>> [email protected]
>>>>> http://lists.opencastproject.org/mailman/listinfo/matterhorn
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> To unsubscribe please email
>>>>> [email protected]
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Matterhorn mailing list
>>>> [email protected]
>>>> http://lists.opencastproject.org/mailman/listinfo/matterhorn
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> To unsubscribe please email
>>>> [email protected]
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Matterhorn mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> http://lists.opencastproject.org/mailman/listinfo/matterhorn
>> 
>> 
>> To unsubscribe please email
>> [email protected]
>> _______________________________________________
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Matterhorn mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.opencastproject.org/mailman/listinfo/matterhorn
> 
> 
> To unsubscribe please email
> [email protected]
> _______________________________________________

_______________________________________________
Matterhorn mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.opencastproject.org/mailman/listinfo/matterhorn


To unsubscribe please email
[email protected]
_______________________________________________

Reply via email to