Child pages
  • 9-23-11 Meeting Agenda and Notes
Skip to end of metadata
Go to start of metadata

Conference Call Info: Video Bridge 22102

  1. Dial the Auto Attendant at 812-856-7060
  2. Enter the conference number (22102) followed by the # key (e.g., 22102#)

Attendees

Who

With

Attended

Benn Oshrin

Internet2 / Various

(tick)

Eric Westfall

Indiana U / Kuali

(tick)

Jeremy Rosenberg

SFU

(tick)

Jimmy Vuccolo

PSU

(tick)

Renee Shuey

PSU

(tick)

RL "Bob" Morgan

U. Washington / Internet2

(tick)

Steven Carmody

Brown

(tick)

Matt Sargent

Kuali

(tick)

Agenda

  1. Introductions/Roll Call
    1. Membership Updates - Matt
  2. All - review of 9/16/2011 All Teams Meeting
  3. All - discussion on what our next steps should be

Notes

matt - aaron has decide to step down from the meetings from here on out

bob - internet 2 meeting next week

bob - are there materials available to show what Kuali Rice components are available to show what Kuali might do, how we got the project started with investors etc.

eric - yes, the most important piece is the Kuali Rice project charter, that lays out the vision objectives, investment model. i'll send that out to the group

bob - on the I2 side, things were not nearly as formal as that, more internal discussions

bob - a week from now, the overall effort, we need to report back to the community of where we are at. how much of our material do we want to make public? Kind of looks chaotic, but nothing is too secret.

eric - i don't think we have anything sensitive out there. do we need to do any clean-up to hide things?

matt - i can take a stab at organizing and cleaning up our space.

benn - what's the message that we're trying to show? here's our stuff, comment? here's our strategy?

bob - need some verbiage on where we are, we have 3 potential code bases, how do we approach accessing those…these are the difficult decisions. not sure how to build from that to a plan.

steve - that's starting to cross the line into implementation, is that part of our charge or is that something that the eventual investors decide?

bob - figuring out what is available and such could be what our work is and presenting that to the investors. kicking the can down the road. if i were a CIO i'd like something a bit firmer than that though.

eric - i wonder if how we approach this is dependent on what the strategy group is proposing, their model. i think it's mostly complete, should we approach our suggestion from that angle

bob - a work package is defined and some parties come together to invest and work on this with one as the care taker and away we go. the job of this team would be to say your job is to produce a registry and it should look like this.

eric - so is there anyone that is ready to take this care taker role on. sure kuali is talking about doing this, but needs to be sorted out more before that decision can be committed to. what's the I2 or Jasig talk on this?

bob - yes, I2 is quite interested in talking about investing, but what that means isn't exactly clear. we have an existing model for getting time from developers and architects, we'd continue w/that. how many and for how long is the obvious question we need to answer. i don't think I2 would insist on being the care taker for the Registry piece, maybe provisioning. the administration effort is a question we need to answer. the upcoming I2 meeting is a good opportunity to talk to the execs on where we want to go with this. the elevator speech as to how we can make that happen.

eric - Jasig might be interested in this as well since they have a Registry component already?

benn - they will probably continue to operate as they always have. ultimately the work comes from member organizations, they don't really fund developer time.

bob - the question would more be to OpenRegistry and their organizations as to whether they would be interested in this activity that would fulfill the needs they have been trying to meet.

jeremy - we were active in Open Registry, that project didn't come together the way we'd hoped, but our need still exists. I think there is still good stuff in the OpenRegistry code base. But we are mostly interested in participating in a healthy project to meet these needs. We certainly don't want to go it alone and I still don't see any commercial solutions that even understand the problem space of a higher ed identity registry.

eric - the challenge for me is that the decisions like this are not made by the tech folks (me), it'd be more for Bill Yock or those at the board level. the feeling i'm getting is that this is of real interest and we have issues we already need to solve related to this (with our student and hr systems) so we have to do something about that. i can take an action item to discuss this with the leadership based on what we have done so far.

bob - the question then is what technical materials need to be at hand to help with those decisison.

eric - so are we looking at some work for this group.

bob - it seems we are all turning to our own respective communities and seeing what they think.

eric - we can talk about what it would take to make a funded project like this to happen. Need a value prop, visions, objectives. From this side we've talked about on the tech side, ref architectures, but that is sort of functional too. Those requirements we've been gathering. Those seem to be the things that need to exist to me.

bob - yes, there are a range of requirements, some core, some less necessary, some not clear as being a registry piece. Need to lay out priorities in development, things to be worked out in terms of scope.

eric - yeah, for a big project, we need to do that. get that list of reqs, scope, prioritize, and the release schedule. so for this group our next steps are…? we've done the requirements, we have a strategy of how the overall project goes. There are going to be I2 discussions, so we need to offer more than what we have already.

bob - there is the summary we presented last week, it could be spun into a more forward looking fashion based on what we talked about today. there is functionality that could be chunked and scoped.

eric - so we're looking at taking what work this group has done and turning that into a project proposal. this is what building an open source registry would look like.

bob - yes, team member skills. the I2 conference is Oct. 3, week after next.

eric - so who in the group would be interested in helping put that together? Eric would be interested (w/Matt in tow). i'd probably want to get bill or hampton involved as well if they could as long as there's no objection. (none from the group)

renee - i'll help where needed.

bob - yeah, it'd be useful to have you since you've done this as part of the project you have. list of skills, time, etc.

steve - i can help some too.

eric - we should raise this wit the strategy group.

bob - i'll do that

bob - matt will work on cleaning up the wiki. i'd like to get a message out to Educause, I2, etc. to point them to public materials by a week from today. finalized by next weeks meeting. eric, please send that kuali material too. (done)

  • No labels