Sprint Iteration Planning -- output from 10-23-2006 meeting

Owned by Former user (Deleted)
Last updated: Oct 26, 2006 by Kirk AlexanderVersion comment

Sakai Planning for the next Sprint Iteration

Meeting Notes

October 23, 2006

1. Biggest effort is 2.2/ 2.3 upgrade
Impact analysis

  • Authentication and User Provider
  • Directory Provider/Rosters
  • WebDav
  • Skins

Investigate Sections but maybe not with tools aware.

Decision: Thomas volunteered to take the lead on this. He'll experiment with upgrading our version of Sakai 2.2 and 2.3 and see what kind of errors occur. Most significant is the effect these upgrades will have on our providers.

James will partner with him. They'll write up their results and speculate on the effort hours. May need one other person on this to focus on Melete upgrade and importing its content. Could be Brian or Lisa.

Estimate

  • James and Thomas will analyze this task for two weeks and then will give an estimate on how long this will take

2. Clustering. We could take the approach of a simple clustered environment, in which everything is on each of the application servers rather than having some modules in shared space and some on the application servers. This is the approach Chris Lamburtus took.

Decision: Thomas will work on this for the next two weeks and see if he can get this into production this way.

Estimate

  • This will take two weeks

3. RAC. This will lead us to creating our 5 different environments (Prod, Integration, Test, Dev, and Release Staging). Currently we have an instance of the Dev database in RAC development environment. We need to connect to it and then test to make sure everything works as it should. Also we need QA to test the set up.

Decision: This should proceed as a priority. Jon and Brian can partner on this effort. Who will own this?

Estimate

  • Once Jon comes back from vacation, around mid November, we need to revisit this issue. According to Brian, who may be able to help, this should not take very long to do. His statement only applies to getting sakai-dev to connect to the RAC instance.

4. AFS Differentiated: This is a more advanced configuration for AFS to separate personal and course page content in AFS. AFS has a constraint for 64,000 files in one folder (volume?) Not sure if this is key for separating personal and course page content.

Decision: This is not as high a priority as the RAC and 2.2 / 2.3 upgrade. This is still owned by Brian. If time allows, Brian may be able to multi task and work on AFS differentiated. The 2.2 / 2.3 upgrade and RAC deployment are more important for Brian's participation.

Estimate

  • Brian is booked at least until mid November. At that time, we need to look at this issue again. He most likely will need a week or tow to analyze the problem in order to give a fairly accurate estimate. We also need to check if this includes the migration of current undifferentiated content.

5. Migrate website content to SmartSite: This was not discussed in our meeting but Kirk asked for this to be considered a priority. This continues to be owned by Brian Donnelly. This is not more important than the 2.2 / 2.3 and RAC upgrade however. If time allows, Brian can work on this task.

Decision: Since we did not discuss this, there was no decision. We need input from Brian on this one.

Estimate

  • Brian is booked at least until mid November. Brian thinks that he may be able to do it either in a "quick and dirty" way or the "right way". We will need to revisit this again once Brian has more time. Lisa also offered to help with this task.

6. Samigo. There are several issues going on with Samigo all now. The Campus was to collaborate with SVN and SOM to address functional issues in collaboration with the Sakai Foundation. Some decision must be made regarding this.

Decision: Liz will talk to Stanford et al to organize a decision making forum for Samigo.

However, with regards to local changes to Samigo, Lisa continues to own the migration tasks already in progress, including importing question pools, export media from Quiz Builder, and exporting question pools from MyUCDavis. These efforts are priorities.

Decision: Lisa will continue finishing up the data migration tasks for Samigo and participate in the 2.2 / 2.3 upgrade as time allows. Sandra will create a story for exporting media from QB.

Estimate

  • James mentioned that Kirk will organize a focus group.

7 SCORM Player This needs to stay on the list even if as a background activity. It is
currently working under 2.2. Work to be done is integration with the Gradebook and ...

8. QA testing tools. The group agreed that there will be many testing (Regression, QA) opportunities in the near future. This is a priority. We could use Silenium but is has a labor-intensive installation curve. Pat says we need to provide her with detailed schedule for our QA needs. Sandra will take ownership in preparing a detailed schedule for when collections of work may be ready for QA.

Decision: Emily will investigate Silenium(sp) and see if she can make progress with its use.
Decision: Sandra will create a schedule of QA testing needs.

Estimate

  • Won't have time until mid November to look into this. She probably will need a few days to see what's involved and to get familiar with the tool.

9. Nightly Builds. This is a nice to have. This allows us to see how far out of synchrony we are from the Foundation's code. This would aid an impact analysis eventually.

Decision: Emily will look into this but it's not an immediate priority.

Estimate

  • Won't have time until mid November to look into this. She probably will need a few days to see what's involved and to get familiar with the tool.

10. Other Jira stories/ enchancements/ bugs still open.

Decision: Kirk and Sandra will identify which other Jira entries that are still open can wait until we are actively working on the 2.2 / 2.3 upgrade.