**** BEGIN LOGGING AT Fri Feb 10 09:41:15 2012 Feb 10 09:59:42 hello Feb 10 10:00:07 hello everyone! Feb 10 10:00:25 hello! Feb 10 10:00:30 hello Feb 10 10:00:51 hi Feb 10 10:01:43 Guillaume is checking on JÃ©rÃ©my Feb 10 10:02:31 It's a bit early for Jeremy ;) Feb 10 10:03:16 hello Feb 10 10:03:21 let's start then ! Feb 10 10:03:45 we had action items about GitHub, but Christophe Hamerling is not here... Feb 10 10:04:28 quote from the minutes: Feb 10 10:04:29 we choose Option â€œOW2@GitHub aggregator€ (second option). Feb 10 10:04:29 Action CHA: initiates a wiki page about this mirroring architecture. Feb 10 10:04:29 Action ALE: identifies mature projects which have their source code outside Feb 10 10:04:51 and I haven't identified yet the mature projects which have their source code outside :-( Feb 10 10:05:48 I can help if you want Feb 10 10:05:48 the next item was: Feb 10 10:05:49 Action JCA: installs XWiki 3.x latest Feb 10 10:05:49 Action ALE: Once this is done, send mail to projects Feb 10 10:05:58 Let's wait for JÃ©rÃ©my to arrive for this. Feb 10 10:06:12 ANd the third one was: Feb 10 10:06:13 Next steps to use the new http://www.ow2.org/view/Proposal/ page for submitting projects to OW2. Feb 10 10:06:13 Action JCA: close the proposal on the Forge Feb 10 10:06:13 Action ALE/JCA: Update the link on the Forge, on website, so that people use the new page. Feb 10 10:06:18 Same, let's wait for JC. Feb 10 10:06:49 First item on the agenda is the infrastructure. Feb 10 10:07:14 any feedback on the project wiki migration? Guillaume? Feb 10 10:07:18 When Jeremy will be there I would like to ask about software updates Feb 10 10:07:24 Yes, of course. Feb 10 10:07:40 We have pending updates for Bamboo, JIRA, Nexus, ... Feb 10 10:07:52 The items for discussion (you can extend the list) for infrastructure was: Feb 10 10:07:53 - infrastructure update Feb 10 10:07:53 -- GIT mirroring Feb 10 10:07:53 -- tools update (Atlassian versions, ...) Feb 10 10:07:53 -- project wiki migration Feb 10 10:07:53 -- download statistics Feb 10 10:07:53 -- project proposal page (migration to new page) Feb 10 10:08:19 There is an additional topic which is our GForge installation which is getting very out of date Feb 10 10:08:32 FYI, OW2 has received a proposal from Sourceforge to host our Forge. Feb 10 10:09:59 Also, I have discussed with people within Orange who are involved in Forges, and they seem to say that an upgrade from GForge to FusionForge (follow-up to GForge, very compatible) should be easily feasible Feb 10 10:10:04 Hello Florent ! Feb 10 10:10:29 Concerning XWiki migration, I know that JASMINe is starting to prepare the migration Feb 10 10:10:37 @fbenoit: FYI, OW2 has received a proposal from Sourceforge to host our Forge. Feb 10 10:10:50 AFAIK Julien has started to work on a new skin Feb 10 10:11:29 What about NovaForge ? Feb 10 10:12:10 for ALE : some project may use Github (or whatever) to host development branch Feb 10 10:12:10 for example, Chameleon Rose is hosted on chameleon, but most of the development is made in GH (Rose Arvensis) and contribute back to chameleon. when something works Feb 10 10:12:10 as the code is contribute back and the release happen on OW2, I'm fine with such practice Feb 10 10:12:12 but it makes this identification a bit more complex Feb 10 10:12:13 (other solution ask project leads) Feb 10 10:13:40 OK ClÃ©ment. Asking project leads is probably a good idea, since we may have the false impression that the development is on OW2 infra. Feb 10 10:13:41 will look weird, but what about CloudBees ? Feb 10 10:13:55 @cescoffier: what do you mean? Feb 10 10:13:57 (for the forge) Feb 10 10:13:59 OK Feb 10 10:14:18 cloudbee is proposing a kind of forge (@Dev or something like that) Feb 10 10:14:28 We should take a look. Feb 10 10:14:33 it won't be hosted by OW2 itself, but could be a valid alternative Feb 10 10:14:51 http://www.cloudbees.com/dev.cb Feb 10 10:14:52 Do we have any strong opinion about code hosting ? Feb 10 10:15:04 that was my next question: should we instanciate CloudBees on OW2 infra, or use a Forge as a service hosted elsewhere. Feb 10 10:15:12 in house or to some other provider ? Feb 10 10:15:16 exact Feb 10 10:15:42 I think cloudbee allow having the code hosted on our side, and they manage the build Feb 10 10:15:51 but it needs to be checked Feb 10 10:15:55 Is it at least possible to have some kind of private cloudbees ? Feb 10 10:16:30 it's a cloud based solution so it's an hard question Feb 10 10:16:47 Doesn't this approach defeats one of the main advantages of the cloud hosted solution: we don't care anymore about the infra (machine upgrades, ...) Feb 10 10:16:49 ? Feb 10 10:16:51 obviously we can have our own instance, but they probably won't be installed by ow2 Feb 10 10:17:15 that's generally the point of the cloud-based solution Feb 10 10:17:32 and CloudBees is not open source ;-) Feb 10 10:17:54 Cloudbees is doing a lot of open source (Jenkins, Maven...) Feb 10 10:18:06 I believe that, regarding the code base, it is crucial enough for OW2 that we need/want to have the repo at least hosted on our infrastructure Feb 10 10:18:13 Yes, CloudBees uses a lot of open source Feb 10 10:18:21 even though the final solution isn't Feb 10 10:18:22 their integrated solution may not be open source, but they leads most of the component they are using Feb 10 10:18:26 exact Feb 10 10:18:43 Hi Ed! Feb 10 10:18:44 We don't have a lot of experience with cloudbees Feb 10 10:18:52 mea culpa, sorry for late arrival Feb 10 10:18:53 but we have a project using it for the build support Feb 10 10:19:01 and the code is not @ cloudbees, but on our site Feb 10 10:19:13 Hi Marc Feb 10 10:19:14 (sorry, same here, got frozen on the way to work) Feb 10 10:19:20 Hi Alex ! Feb 10 10:19:47 Does the code needs to be on OW2 own machine or hosted on an OW2 "service" (OW2 pays for a "forge service") ? Feb 10 10:19:48 and actually cloudbees integrates xwiki Feb 10 10:19:59 nope, it can be on ow2 servers Feb 10 10:20:07 [discussing our Forge which is out of date, and the possibility to upgrade it to FusionForge, the possibility to use CloudBees/Dev, the possibility to use services proposed by SourceForge] Feb 10 10:20:53 Bare in mind that, in the long term (no identified roadmap yet), NovaForge is still identified as a possibility for migrating our Forge to. Feb 10 10:21:53 so in that case it reduces our possibilities Feb 10 10:22:04 begs the thought of standardising forge interop and data migration though it would be great to support Nova team in the long run Feb 10 10:22:05 we just need to update to fusion forge and wait novaforge Feb 10 10:22:24 other migration will be to difficult (the come back to a full hosted solution) Feb 10 10:22:53 FusionForge migration should be easy, yes. Feb 10 10:23:03 that's a +1 straight away then Feb 10 10:23:15 Migration to anything else (whether NovaForge, CloudBees) would be more work (but feasible) Feb 10 10:23:55 And yes, Ed, you are right about standardisation: the Orange Forge guys tell me that standards are emerging at the moment at the tracker level, but not yet at the "service" level (a Forge being a set of services) Feb 10 10:25:06 I feel that we should have a discussion with Jeremy about forge migration Feb 10 10:25:11 hmm, another area for ow2 to champion/evolve though with our resources would be nice to see the academics put the work in there for us Feb 10 10:25:32 he is the best placed guy to have a valuable opinion on this Feb 10 10:25:55 gsauthier1: agree, most definitely Feb 10 10:26:03 OK Feb 10 10:26:10 Let's get back to this when JC arrives. Feb 10 10:26:26 Maybe we should conduct this discussion on a TC mail thread ? (it's a huge subject) Feb 10 10:26:53 ... and move on to the next point ? :) Feb 10 10:26:55 Let us: 1. ask for JC's input, 2. start a thread on TC Feb 10 10:27:22 ok Feb 10 10:27:37 While we wait for JC, any other remarks/info/questions/rant about infrastructure? Feb 10 10:27:44 just to say the "forge" concept is not up to date anymore Feb 10 10:27:55 alfresco just closed his, a lot of others also Feb 10 10:28:11 mdutoo: +1 Feb 10 10:28:19 because of github and other 2nd generation online development repositories Feb 10 10:28:43 yes, people look for services (repo, trackers, lists, etc) Feb 10 10:28:47 so source management is externalized, but you can still hook in continuous integration Feb 10 10:28:49 and forges have a pretty bad reputation in term of usability / complexity Feb 10 10:28:51 they don't really care that they are integrated Feb 10 10:29:05 however, multiple logins are a pain in the neck Feb 10 10:29:13 here at Open Wide we're using our own portal integrating externalized (or not services) called wombat Feb 10 10:29:50 so if we feel we'd like github source management in addition to inhouse git and subversion we just implement the right provisioning and right management methods Feb 10 10:30:02 no custom ui etc. Feb 10 10:30:16 very clean - and mirrored identity/access via the portal i guess Feb 10 10:30:25 exactly ultra lightweight Feb 10 10:30:35 modular you could say esdaniel ;) Feb 10 10:31:02 osgi-esque? Feb 10 10:31:09 that's the brainchild of guillaume smet who once was trying to think up next generation forges with bull guys a long time ago Feb 10 10:31:19 only spring for now, but osgi-ready i guess Feb 10 10:31:22 we already have decoupled services at OW2, Gitorious/SVN, mailing lists are separate, trackers (JIRA or the Forge tracker), Sonar is separate, wikis are separate, etc etc Feb 10 10:31:39 yep thats a very good direction it's taking Feb 10 10:31:49 alefebvr: but logins are separate too (for most of the services) :) Feb 10 10:32:06 well we have the same setup, and just use LDAP Feb 10 10:32:09 in the process of being integrated with the Atlassian SSO solution Feb 10 10:32:19 (cannot remember the name right now, Altzheimer) Feb 10 10:32:19 good Feb 10 10:32:28 Crowd Feb 10 10:32:33 merci ! Feb 10 10:32:34 Sonar, SVN, Gtblit (not gitorious), Jira and our Confluence are connected to our LDAP Feb 10 10:33:02 was name Atalassian Studio, but they probably changed their name) Feb 10 10:33:08 so what i'd say is only migrate to fusion forge if the current forge being unsupported is a critical blocking point AND we don't have the timespan and resources to do better Feb 10 10:33:40 but... next on the mailing lists :) Feb 10 10:33:50 mdutoo: yep Feb 10 10:34:14 agree Feb 10 10:34:27 +1 Feb 10 10:34:40 let's wait for JC and we'll come back to infrastructure questions Feb 10 10:35:15 Next item is SQuAT ? Feb 10 10:35:21 OK. Feb 10 10:35:34 I have sent the reminder for OMM self-evaluation. Feb 10 10:36:08 We have had 5 self-evaluations, and Lakshmi from the OW2 Management Office is sending out individual reminders Feb 10 10:36:28 Gusp, I received 2 of them ... Need to take some time to fill the form(s) Feb 10 10:36:36 I know, I know Feb 10 10:36:54 do not hesistate to ask for help from the Management Office or myself for the self-evaluation. Feb 10 10:37:11 Also, the Qualipso Competence Center can help too. Feb 10 10:38:26 We have asked for an update from Fossology -> their servers were attacked end 2011, and they have restored the project server, but not the repository. Feb 10 10:38:33 We are still waiting for an update on this. Feb 10 10:38:52 In the mean time, I can use the private instance of Fossology at Orange if someone wants to scan their codebase. Feb 10 10:39:05 I have done it for example for OW2 Utils for Guillaume. Feb 10 10:39:24 Thanks again for that Feb 10 10:39:51 It was really useful to find places where licensing was missing/uncorrect Feb 10 10:40:01 That's OK, it's part of my job :-) Feb 10 10:40:41 So, if other projects need to have a scan of their code base (for finding missing headers or uncorrect licences), do not hesitate. Feb 10 10:41:13 About TSR (Trustie Software Resource Repository), which does reputation management: Feb 10 10:41:39 they had tried to install it on OW2 infrastructure, but had conflicts and problems of installation. Feb 10 10:41:56 * KPTN (~KPTN@lyon.oodo.net) has joined #ow2-tc Feb 10 10:42:04 They have re-engineered a new version in December/January, and should be installing it shortly. Feb 10 10:42:36 Anout Sonar -> I have asked project leaders to tell me where to find their codebase and which pom to run Feb 10 10:42:53 this is tricky Feb 10 10:42:56 Then, the idea is that Guillaume will create Bamboo jobs to launch the Sonar evaluation Feb 10 10:43:06 modular project like chameleon does not really have a central pom for exerything Feb 10 10:43:35 in this case, we could identify multiple poms, one for each module? Feb 10 10:43:39 does this make sense? Feb 10 10:43:49 Isn't it possible to still have some kind of reactor maven project ? Feb 10 10:43:57 yep. but you have around 70 modules :-) Feb 10 10:44:11 we have a reactor pom BUT it does not configure the build Feb 10 10:44:21 just the list of module (no plugin) Feb 10 10:44:29 the parent pom and the reactor pom are different Feb 10 10:44:32 yep that was what I was expecting Feb 10 10:44:45 a reactor, not a parent Feb 10 10:44:57 but you must have a way to build the whole beast ? Feb 10 10:45:11 a reactor just say: "run this, this and that" Feb 10 10:45:24 alefebvr: that's the point of the reactor Feb 10 10:45:31 ok Feb 10 10:45:31 in contrail we have one pom to build the entire project Feb 10 10:45:41 good guy, SÃ©bastien ;-) Feb 10 10:45:55 I'm interested in having contrail in sonar Feb 10 10:46:20 we already have SLALOI in http://sonar.ow2.org/ Feb 10 10:46:23 and replace the sla@soi, which is not our code actually Feb 10 10:46:31 OK, we'll do. Feb 10 10:46:36 thx Feb 10 10:46:53 back to reactors -> what is a possible solution? Feb 10 10:47:07 can Bamboo manage the reactors? Feb 10 10:47:17 I think so Feb 10 10:47:25 the issue is that the reactors does not instructs the build configuration Feb 10 10:47:25 It's just a normal build after all Feb 10 10:47:35 it just say: let's build A,B,C ... Feb 10 10:47:47 where A will be built using its own configuration Feb 10 10:48:07 and what's the issue with this ? Feb 10 10:48:20 running sonar, is just a matter of 'mvn sonar:sonar' Feb 10 10:48:34 no extra configuration is required in the project's POM AFAIK Feb 10 10:48:43 to get sonar working . we need to modify the parent pom, which means changing all modules and deal with all the trickiest thing of maven Feb 10 10:49:04 no good Feb 10 10:49:06 We didn't had to do that with easybeans Feb 10 10:49:26 sonar:sonar requires stuff to indicate the checkstyle, findbugs rules Feb 10 10:50:13 and the populated DB Feb 10 10:50:39 AFAIU, our Bamboo is preconfigured for that Feb 10 10:50:49 Jeremy could tell you more about this Feb 10 10:51:37 it's actually in the Sonar (the checkstyle, findbug rules) Feb 10 10:51:50 at the moment, there is the OW2 Sonar profile, which is used by default Feb 10 10:51:58 well but it does not allow projects to configure their rules Feb 10 10:52:03 but you can ask it to use another profile Feb 10 10:52:10 and if you need fancy configuration for cobertura, you're lost too Feb 10 10:52:16 What Clement means is that when you run sonar:sonar, you have to say at least: "send the result there" Feb 10 10:53:02 sonar:sonar is simple: it runs a couple of plugins and send the result to a DB. The Sonar web site then analyze the results and create the nice reports Feb 10 10:53:03 at the moment sonar:sonar sends the results to sonar.ow2.org, and I'll have to look into the maven sonar command to see what options are possible (such as select another rule profile, indicate where the results goÃ ) Feb 10 10:53:22 should be possible to add options (?) Feb 10 10:53:53 yes, of course, but far from being easy if we need to do that for all modules Feb 10 10:54:04 I understand Feb 10 10:54:15 we'll look into it Feb 10 10:54:25 so you run Sonar currently on your machines? Feb 10 10:55:02 some of our modules (actually the one use in prod systems) are analyzed following a pretty strict set of rules and stored on our sonar Feb 10 10:55:16 but we do that for 10 modules only Feb 10 10:55:22 (maybe more Today) Feb 10 10:56:12 and do you do it module by module separately (and painfully :-) ? Feb 10 10:56:27 yes :-) Feb 10 10:56:43 but even worse, modules may have different configuration Feb 10 10:57:19 for example, OSGi considers Class.forName as evil (because it is actually), so we have a blocker rule for that Feb 10 10:57:24 OK, let's say we'll take a closer look at how to deal with Chameleon Feb 10 10:57:40 however we have 2 modules, using it because they may not be used in OSGi environment Feb 10 10:59:02 OK. Feb 10 10:59:23 About SQuAT, the discussion is now about the SQuAT enforcement calendar... Feb 10 10:59:48 The idea of SQuAT is that it should be compulsory for all OW2 Mature projects. Feb 10 11:00:16 The idea is to deploy OMM + Sonar + Fossology + Antepedia now, and have it complete by April/May. Feb 10 11:00:35 So that we can show a full coverage then Feb 10 11:00:41 Reactions? Suggestions? Feb 10 11:02:22 What is the deadline for OMM ? Feb 10 11:02:31 as a first step Feb 10 11:03:47 mid Feb Feb 10 11:04:04 mid February is in a couple of days right ? Feb 10 11:04:35 15 Feb in fact Feb 10 11:04:40 yes I know Feb 10 11:04:47 this is why we are sending reminders... Feb 10 11:04:59 ok :-) Feb 10 11:05:06 (sigh) Feb 10 11:05:33 nice weekend in perspective ;) Feb 10 11:05:36 :D Feb 10 11:06:16 BTW, who received a reminder among peoples here ? Feb 10 11:06:28 me this morning ... Feb 10 11:06:35 (the reminders were sent as we speak) Feb 10 11:07:16 Florent should have got one too Feb 10 11:07:41 Let's move on to the next item: projects Feb 10 11:07:54 There are no new submissions as far as I know Feb 10 11:08:50 Mentors: any update Guillaume Feb 10 11:08:57 ? Feb 10 11:08:58 do you think a search-project is in the interest? Feb 10 11:09:19 No new projects so no new mentoring :) Feb 10 11:10:01 i came across one that's promoting itself and on sourceforge - wanted to know if there's already any history re: http://www.open-search-server.com/ Feb 10 11:10:12 gsauthier1: Two reminders Feb 10 11:10:43 Do you mean, Ed, that they are open source and could be looking for a community? Feb 10 11:10:47 fbenoit: got 3 :) Feb 10 11:11:27 yes, OS though i don't think they know of one, they posted to Laurent Seguin's LinkedIn group saying hello and I mentioned our pro-active ecosystem :-) Feb 10 11:11:52 jsut wondered if they'd already passed by or not Feb 10 11:12:14 sorry, typing too fast for my meagre abilities Feb 10 11:12:26 that's OK Feb 10 11:12:59 could you please send me a pointer, and we'll look into it? Feb 10 11:13:06 for your ref: http://www.linkedin.com/groupItem?view=&gid=3188107&type=member&item=91883429 Feb 10 11:13:10 Thanks! Feb 10 11:13:43 Regarding mentors, we have the Mentor page http://www.ow2.org/view/Technology_Council/Mentors Feb 10 11:13:53 I'm wondering whether it is up to date or not... Feb 10 11:14:21 From what I know yes Feb 10 11:14:24 does anyone here think I could be a mentor? feel free to flame if you wish, thick skinned ;-) Feb 10 11:15:19 But I can resend the link to the TC asking who want to participate. The idea is to have a list of people potentially interested to be mentors Feb 10 11:15:24 no need to, but thanks for offering Ed Feb 10 11:15:44 that's a good idea Guillaume (a "pool" of potential mentors) Feb 10 11:15:46 Simply add yourself into the list Feb 10 11:16:00 given that ... the TC should be a pool of potential mentors, ideally ;-) Feb 10 11:16:41 sure, but some are more active than others Feb 10 11:16:57 yes I understand Feb 10 11:17:06 done Feb 10 11:17:34 And it could helps new projects to contact OW2 peoples, some kind of public entry points Feb 10 11:17:41 good! Feb 10 11:17:58 (it's a bit more than the traditional meaning of mentoring, but anyway ...) Feb 10 11:18:09 * KPTN has quit (Remote host closed the connection) Feb 10 11:18:55 Next (nearly last) point is Mature projects Feb 10 11:19:34 we had talked about a systematic review of the current mature projects to enforce the rules described in http://www.ow2.org/view/Technology_Council/Project_Maturation Feb 10 11:19:52 And, also, there are still Talend and Weblab pending Feb 10 11:19:59 Weblab will get back to us soon Feb 10 11:20:09 I need to ping Cedric Carbone about Talend Feb 10 11:20:25 Philippe Merle seems to consider that Frascati should be elligible Feb 10 11:20:47 above the list of mentors, it would be nice to have a small text that explains the exact role of a mentor (or a link to this text) Feb 10 11:20:54 (sorry, out of sync) Feb 10 11:21:02 sandre: ok for the link Feb 10 11:23:18 So, Guillaume, do you have any more precise idea about a Mature project review? Should we discuss it first, and then get back to the TC? Feb 10 11:24:47 yes Feb 10 11:25:19 FYI, Cedric Thomas is visiting Grenoble mid March, and we are planning discussions with Guillaume Feb 10 11:25:34 We'll probably discuss this very point (how to proceed) Feb 10 11:25:40 and get back to the TC about it Feb 10 11:25:54 in the mean time, maybe we could spend a few minutes discussing it together? Feb 10 11:26:13 How do you view a review of all projects to validate their mature status? Feb 10 11:26:16 The idea is to have a "live" link between projects and OW2 board, So theses guys know better what we are doing :) Feb 10 11:26:51 at least I see that review like this :) Feb 10 11:27:12 Page http://www.ow2.org/view/Technology_Council/Project_Maturation has link to a "mature checklist" document Feb 10 11:27:39 Should we first ask projects to fill it, or should we plan a direct contact with each project to go throug the list? Feb 10 11:29:23 sandre: done Feb 10 11:29:33 [this topic does not seem to raise enthusiasm...] Feb 10 11:29:48 reports always reports ... :) Feb 10 11:30:04 :-) Feb 10 11:30:05 I agree, too much process Feb 10 11:30:26 -> so instead of reports, we should take the "live" link approach then Feb 10 11:30:31 it's a bit hard to follow all those reports, squat, OMM Feb 10 11:30:35 proposed by Guillaume Feb 10 11:30:45 yep good idea Feb 10 11:30:46 i.e. spend some time directly with each project Feb 10 11:30:47 @esdaniel: thx Feb 10 11:31:14 would also help increase the community feeling too Feb 10 11:31:30 sandre: esdaniel: done too (but at the top of the page :) ) Feb 10 11:31:49 Is it something like the PMC reports of apache ? Feb 10 11:32:14 ClÃ©ment? Feb 10 11:32:28 gsauthier1 - like your formatting more than mine, removed footer Feb 10 11:32:43 esdaniel: :) Feb 10 11:33:12 @cescoffier: can you remind us how Apache PMC reports work? Feb 10 11:33:18 well the apache quarter report contains the activity of a project Feb 10 11:33:25 releases, new committers, strategy Feb 10 11:33:29 PMC decisions Feb 10 11:33:33 but it is yet another report then ;-) Feb 10 11:33:59 nope Feb 10 11:35:32 so? Feb 10 11:35:43 it's easier for OW2 to know if a project is still active with the simple presence of the report or not ... Feb 10 11:35:52 but more burden on the project Feb 10 11:36:16 but it's better also for OW2 and the project if there is direct discussion and contact Feb 10 11:36:23 what is the project benefits to fill in this report ? Feb 10 11:36:53 the Apache board read them Feb 10 11:37:05 if peoples things it is beneficial for them to do stuff, they won't complain to do it (or less complain) Feb 10 11:37:11 and decide if needed to put the project in 'ATTIC' Feb 10 11:37:20 s/things/thinks Feb 10 11:37:27 it's kind of rare and happen only on project without activity for several years Feb 10 11:37:40 OK Feb 10 11:37:44 gsauthier1: further proof of good governance of the project, further proof of leadership in action, helping the evangelists keep in step with the project Feb 10 11:37:56 awareness, then Feb 10 11:38:23 evidence-based Feb 10 11:38:38 fact vs fiction Feb 10 11:39:31 theses reports then have to be publicly available Feb 10 11:39:35 OK, I still think that, in order to help produce such a report (with the "yet another one" feeling), OW2 (me? other people to identify) need to spend a little time in a direct exchange with the project Feb 10 11:40:28 probably at the beginning, but the time being, projects will have to produce theses pieces of information alone Feb 10 11:41:35 I think that could be a good thing to have such report Feb 10 11:41:40 there is no magic here, the projects will have to produce the info, but it is more human to have direct interactions with them Feb 10 11:41:50 gsauthier1: perhaps we can lean on some automation, i.e. stats capture that is common to all projects as basis for further discussion Feb 10 11:42:21 because that could encourage project to project collaboration also Feb 10 11:42:26 we all know instinctively what to look for to identify projects' state per se Feb 10 11:43:15 we don't always know what precisely other projects are doing Feb 10 11:43:41 even if we have know their overall objective Feb 10 11:43:45 florentgarin: yes, we're missing some synthetic information on project status Feb 10 11:44:07 you can determine the activity Feb 10 11:44:16 by analysing commits / and releases Feb 10 11:44:25 ASAIK ohloh uses this approach to measure projects activity (number of commits, contributors, length of code history...) Feb 10 11:44:45 ohloh is great example of what i was inferring, thank you sandre Feb 10 11:45:03 Engineering has offered to setup SpagoBI for collecting those Feb 10 11:45:21 good idea - i already played with that demo and it 'works' ;-) Feb 10 11:45:22 that should ease greatly the collection of factual information Feb 10 11:45:43 yes we can analysing commits but as we know not all project use the OW2 repository their central repository Feb 10 11:46:19 I know I know Feb 10 11:46:23 florentgarin: might be possible to track other repos data though Feb 10 11:46:27 yes ;-) Feb 10 11:46:29 yes should be possible Feb 10 11:46:48 and that in and of itself is useful to know :-p Feb 10 11:47:59 OK, done for this point so far? Feb 10 11:48:11 Next point was coming events Feb 10 11:48:18 http://www.ow2.org/view/Events/Cloud_Computing_World_Expo_ Feb 10 11:48:41 OW2 will hold its general assembly there (Paris, CNIT La DÃ©fense, 28-29 March) Feb 10 11:48:47 General Assembly should be on 28 March. Feb 10 11:49:00 Should we plan a F2F meeting there? Feb 10 11:49:07 An IRC meeting before? After ? Feb 10 11:50:07 I suppose I can attend Feb 10 11:50:12 if you're staying overnight and not got other plans would be nice to do dinner/beers Feb 10 11:50:54 :-) Feb 10 11:52:05 I think we have a possibility to have a room on the 28th. Feb 10 11:52:11 Hi Jeremy! Feb 10 11:52:13 Hi Feb 10 11:52:15 all Feb 10 11:52:24 Is there any other event where we could have a F2F TC in 1H2012 ? Feb 10 11:52:35 hi Feb 10 11:52:37 Solutions Linux Feb 10 11:52:57 http://www.ow2.org/view/Events/Solutions_Linux Feb 10 11:53:03 June 19-21 Feb 10 11:53:05 Paris too Feb 10 11:53:28 we don't need to decide now. Feb 10 11:53:44 maybe we could doodle for the two events, and see which one has most potential participants, and then decide Feb 10 11:53:44 Last year, we had 3 F2F. aCloud Expo, Solution Linux and OW2Con Feb 10 11:53:56 that was a good rate Feb 10 11:54:00 yes I agree Feb 10 11:54:03 IMHO Feb 10 11:54:24 so if we could have March, June and November (OW2Con) that would be good Feb 10 11:54:30 for F2F Feb 10 11:54:32 yep Feb 10 11:54:45 so, next IRC when then?N Feb 10 11:55:02 (and we'll get back to infra with Jeremy) Feb 10 11:55:09 beginning of march ? Feb 10 11:55:13 re: f2f anyone done a google hangout yet? Feb 10 11:55:28 esdaniel: no Feb 10 11:55:43 fyi i created a TC circle to bother you all as much as possible ;-) Feb 10 11:55:55 OK!! Feb 10 11:57:07 OK, we'll send a doodle for next IRC early March, and announcements for possible F2F at CloudComputingWorldExpo and SolutionsLinux Feb 10 11:57:22