=== TCOM ===
User Communities
- FAO presented its goals, data collections available, standards adopted, scenarios to implement. FAO scenario simpler then the ESA one. Open to share their applications and content. Good set of tools to be execute on gLite.
- ESA wants to make sure effort in D4S is put in production and not in further developments (and tried to pass this message to FAO)
SA1
- UNIBAS doesn't want to support gLite nodes... to much effort to maintain them in a production environment
- ESA and FAO may argue that they don't have requirements to use gLite.. so why should they deploy gLite?
SA3
- same strategy as DILIGENT
- but without major release, since we start with an existing SW we will only perform upgrades on a component basis
Project Tools
- D4S website
- BSCW or KnowledgeTree
- TRAC or Savane
- ETICS
- MediaWiki or TWiki
- Mailing lists per activity and work package
TCom Meetings
- 3-7 March Pisa
- 2-6 June Athens
- 22-26 September Basel or Glasgow
- 12-16 January Basel or Glasgow
Standards
- commission is pushing a lot to participation in OGF. Possible participation in groups GSM-WG, INFOD-WG, OGSA-DMI-WG.
=== gCore Meeting ===
- underlying technology abstraction: (1) need to have generic configuration files ? JNDI wrapper includes in gCore (2) semantic equivalence between EPRs. do we a mechanism to have abstract EPR? Call a method without knowing the class.name
- gCF analysis: Discussion about the components that should be part of the gCore Framework (gCF) and part of the gCore distribution package. The degree of abstraction over the underlying container and the different visions of the gCore scope affected the selection of components to include.
- discussion about the gCore management aspects. gCore voting procedure.
=== Quality Assurance ===
Management Structure (Roles and Responsibilities)
Deliverable review
- with the new rules of deliverables being submitted on the exact expected due day the solution is to ask the EC to move the deadline of some deliverables (at least the ones that are "normal" deliverables)
- CNR will evaluate which deliverables can be moved on month more
- deadlines:
. assign reviewer Mx - 2 month
. send TOC Mx - 6 weeks
. deliverable to review Mx - 3 weeks
. deliverable to PMB 3rd Tuesday of Mx
. PMB approval 4th Monday of Mx
. deliverable to EC Mx
Evaluation of progress reports (quarterly reports)
- same style as in DILIGENT
- different sections according to the area
- only justify that some components are in delays or do not pass the certification conditions
- the certification conditions are described in the NA1 Quality deliverable
- deadlines:
. 20 February - contribution from Activity Manager to the certification
. 24 February - to propose template for quarterly report (criteria list attached to the template)
. draft template and criteria discussed at February PMB
. template to be finalise for March PMB
There are minutes attached to this event.
Show them.
