2007-01-08 Conference Call

Owned by Former user (Deleted)
Last updated: Feb 05, 2007 by Former user (Deleted)Version comment
3 min read

Meeting minutes for Jan 8, 2006

Agenda item 1: Project Management

  • Meeting minutes from Dec 18
    • no one took down the meeting minutes from the Dec 18 meeting. That meeting was largely a progress report of work to date.
  • Confluence pages
    • There are a couple of confluence pages out there detailing the 2.4 requirements. We agreed to keep and maintain the "Full text requirements" page and eliminate the rest.
  • Jira tasks for requirements
    • We all agree that creating Jira tasks for each of the OSP 2.4 requirements listed in Confluence is a good idea.
    • Sean had started that task and will continue to do so.
    • Beth and Gonzalo have already been doing that work for the UI requirements.
    • Sean will assign the Jira tasks he creates to the appropriate people and tag them for "Sakai 2.4.001"
  • Jira tasks from developers and worker bees
    • We agreed that as each developer, documenter identifies subtasks for the top level tasks, they are responsible to create Jira tasks for the 2.4.001 release.

Agenda Item 2: Outstanding Issues

  • Jim Pease asked the group for feedback about his approach to changing the rating scale configuration for the 4th bullet of OSP-GM-1. Syracuse has a use case in mind that would suggest that a common rating scale but would like feedack from RHINET stakeholders. Hannah said she would connect to Janice Smith to get her feedback.
  • OSP-GM-02 mentions wireframes for the new layout of an evaluation page. There are no wireframes. No one made one, so we will remove mention of them.
  • Beth received adequate feedback to come to a conclusion on the matrix mutability question. She decided to make the row and column names an optional field.

Agenda Item 3: Progress Reports

  • UI
    • OSP-UI-01 and OSP-UI-03 are complete
    • Beth and Gonzalo report that they are waiting on some service level work to be done for a few of the UI requirements but are expecting that those roadblocks will be removed by mid-January
    • Since Jim Eng's work on resources is key to some these requirements, OSP-UI-04, OSP-UI-05 requirements will be transferred from rSmart to UMich.
    • Beth mentioned that she may not be able to get to all of the Type II UI requirements. Indiana will be having a meeting this week with UMich to see if they can help divide that work up.
    • Gonzalo will rewrite OSP-UI-13 because it is irrelevant since forms are not in resources any longer.
  • Documentation
    • There isn't a good shared understanding about what good Documentation looks like yet. Hannah said she would see if she could get clearance to release some rSmart documentation as a model for user docs for OSP.
    • The developer Javadocs are created from comments in the code. Typically developer documentation should be created with maven if OSP code lived in the sakaiproject.org namespace. It doesn't, so a decision has to be made by a framework guru to allow docs to be generated from theospi.org namespace. Lance Speelman will try to see that exception can be made for OSP.
    • Chris Maurer mentioned that the OSP code is largely undocumented anyway. He encouraged developers to document their code and when they do to add "@inheritDoc" to the documentation section of their code.
  • Authoring Flexibility
    • Beth is working on OSP-WF-01 and 02 (add and remove matrix rows) and believes it ready for some testing, which Dawn said she was ready to begin.
    • IUPUI is interested in adding a way to hide a matrix from view.
  • Reports
    • Nothing to report other than Brooke from rSmart will be working on the requirements
  • Forward Compatibility
    • We had a side discussion about migration from OSP 2.0 to any post 2.0 release of OSP. No one has stepped up to champion the cause for the many institutions that are still using 2.0. While we recognized that this is a problem (particularly for those institutions not working with a commercial group like rSmart to help with that transition), none of us have resource to dedicate to solve that issue.
  • Builders
    • I have no notes on that
  • QA
    • Sean, Melissa and maybe Jan (Hannah will contact her) will post use cases to a section of confluence so that the testing doesn't merely focus on features, but also on workflows that we plan to use the toolset to accomplish.
    • Megan May has said that their are 1FTE and 2 GA from Marist that will be available for testing.