Versions Compared

Key

  • This line was added.
  • This line was removed.
  • Formatting was changed.

...

  • Chuck with LTI, Kirk Alexander with Gradebook2, Assignments2 at IU, Nuno with SiteStats, perhaps others
  • LTI a good first prospect in some ways, but won't present a thorough workout of the process because it's fairly narrow. Still, may present some issues that would be good to work through (such as cross-institutional support).
  • Whatever we start with, wouldn't want it to be something that might tend toward rejection
  • It's not really rejection, it's more a process of identifying what more is needed, and helping people to get there. It's valuable to raise these questions in a solvable form. Spur to doing work in incubation
  • LTI a good first prospect in some ways, but won't present a thorough workout of the process because it's fairly narrow. Still, may present some issues that would be good to work through (such as cross-institutional support).
  • Would be good to review code in light of our ability to support it; eg LTI touches on portal - who's working on that, who can, and what would that mean for maintenance expectations?
  • Would something like LTI allow us to fast-forward the development stages in a collapsed timeframe?
  • Need to get projects to self-document, with standardized documentation to show that it's gone through the steps.
  • Wouldn't want to have to say "Do these steps," then check them off, then come back with more steps and keep ratcheting things up ... want to lay things out clearly ahead of time
  • Whether or not there's a maintenance team ... might influence these decisions [aside: Anthony's working on a proposal for this]

...

  • (see Incubation Documentation). Would like to see clearer description of process: make it public enough that people can see what's happening, how to get involved and how you see the process to be managed. For example, it seems the Foundation already committing resources to Sakai 3, need to look meaningfully at K2, eg, ... documenting clearly about what's going on
  • Would it be asking too much to ask people to list rough timeline?
  • Arriving at a credible timeline may be what they're trying to get into incubation for in the first place: to recruit resource, flesh out a project plan
  • We have a good starting point for incubation entry, but need also to get drafts going for further stages, and see those take shape. Even if it's only preliminary thinking, we need something for the community to begin to reckon against and comment on.
  • Wouldn't want to have to say "Do these steps," then check them off, then come back with more steps and keep ratcheting things up ... want to lay things out clearly ahead of time
  • Max, Nate and Eli ready to help edit results of discussion.

...