Versions Compared

Key

  • This line was added.
  • This line was removed.
  • Formatting was changed.
Comment: Migrated to Confluence 4.0

...

...

...

\[11:00\] <cwilper> Note: We're starting this meeting soon, anyone's free to call in: [http://fedora-commons.org/confluence/display/FCREPO/2010-03-09+-+Special+Topic+-+3.4+Scoping+Kickoff] \
[11:06\] <sbayliss> [http://www.fedora-commons.org/confluence/display/FCREPO/Feb+23-24+2010%2C+London+Committer+Meeting] \
[11:10\] <cwilper> ECM: Green items seem to fit for 3.4 \
[11:14\] <cwilper> SDef/Dep Improvement: Dependency on module architecture rework \
[11:16\] * awoods\_ is now known as awoods \
[11:28\] <cwilper> ...SDef/Dep Improvement: For 3.4, shift to use module framework idioms but no big change in functionality, positions us for bigger items for 4.0 (extra verbs, etc) \
[11:29\] <eddies> is our maven repo down? see fc-users \
[11:32\] <awoods> [https://fedora-commons.org/m2/index.html] \
[11:32\] <awoods> appears so \
[11:32\] <cwilper> Module framework: Spring for 3.4 seems tractable and not too disruptive, let's shoot for it. \
[11:32\] <cwilper> (looking into m2 issue) \
[11:34\] <cwilper> High level storage: Some cleanup/prep can happen for 3.4, but major move to highlevel storage (and versioning discussion) is a 4.0 thing \
[11:43\] <cwilper> 503 & Retry-after: Yes for 3.4, creating JIRA issue for it...need an impl that supports it (externally-developed) \
[11:50\] <barmintor> [http://virtuoso.openlinksw.com/main/rdf/index.htm] \
[11:51\] <cwilper> Semweb: Green and some blue items fair game for 3.4, quad store and graph hierarchy better for 4.0 \
[11:53\] <barmintor> CModel-based triple generation is a desired item under both SDef/Dep Improvement and Semweb \
[12:03\] <cwilper> FESL: Currentl stuff Steve's working on is in scope for 3.4, round2 FESL=not counting on for 3.4, funding question \
[12:11\] <cwilper> ideas for community involvement: \
[12:11\] <cwilper> Bill: Dev challenges for 3.4? \
[12:16\] <cwilper> Andrew: Release candidates?&nbsp;   Chris possibly at code freeze: don't necessitate a physical file release, could have people get it from svn at code freeze time.&nbsp;   Steve: tagging would be good. \
[12:23\] <awoods> special topic candidates for next week: \
[12:23\] <awoods> Module Arch Development? \
[12:27\] <cwilper> Aaron: Versioning \
[12:27\] <cwilper> Ben: 20mins or so on SDep/Def, not enough for full meeting yet \
[12:29\] <cwilper> Dan: Invite Northwestern folks, and Paul re:Islandora \
[12:29\] <cwilper> Steve: Further down the line: SemWeb area...not ready yet \
[12:33\] <cwilper> RE: Release timing: Agreement on getting a code freeze/release candidate out 1 or 2 weeks before OR.&nbsp;   One option is to release just prior, another option is to use OR'10 as a chance to get the wider community involved with testing/wrap-up on 3.4.&nbsp;   In either case, we can still use OR'10 to start getting people involved early in the cycle for 4.0 topics.