[Contrib: Evaluation System] Notice: Merging EVALSYS-861 to trunk?

Wed Jun 23 08:39:43 PDT 2010

In reading through this, I think we should consider taking a step back and
getting the evaluation project setup like a mini Sakai-project. There
appears to be enough distributed interest and necessity for this to happen.
The biggest problem it seemed to me from the BOF is that there hasn't active
release management (branching/tags) of evaluation done in over a year. So
everyone is taking HEAD of trunk as being the best version of evaluation to
run.

So that's the first problem that needs to be addressed by this PMC. I will
volunteer to assist with the release management if my project manager
agrees.

As a initial plan:

1) PMC should choose a revision of trunk to make as the initial 'stable'
branch of evaluation. Perhaps the version that longsight is using (since
this is the newest of all the versions on [1]) is a good one?

2) We will make a branch (1.3.x) and tag this as a RC (since people are
running it already). QA will run through it and bug fixes will be
made/merged. This can be setup as an independent release project so it's
built on builds.sakaiproject and easier to include as well.

3) Only bug fixes will be made to the branch. Once QA is satisfied, a final
tag will be made.

4) Meanwhile, features (and other active work like this) can still be made
against trunk (without individual issue approval) in preparation for the
next release. Nobody should be running because they can run the branch/tag.
This will be tracked in jira. Developers like Jim shouldn't have to ask
permission (48 hours or else), but they might have their item removed or
changed in an final release.

PMC can then meet to discuss (all at one time, every few weeks? once a
month?) what should make it to the next release. Developers would either
have to remove/hide items that are decided as not wanted or resolve
them. This process has worked pretty well for the RM meetings, and it's
unproductive to dwell over each issue one at a time.

-Matthew

[1] http://confluence.sakaiproject.org/display/EVALSYS/Adopters

On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 10:46 AM, Jim Eng <jimeng at umich.edu> wrote:

> There is no hurry.
>
> Just a comment on process: I did understand that the members of this
> committee would essentially have veto power, which I would interpret as
> power to ask for refinements in proposed merges.  I did not understand that
> it would take unanimous affirmative vote of the members of the committee to
> get anything into trunk.
>
> This proposal has no impact other than the need for a database change. We
> have SQL for creating new tables with the proposed change, but I haven't yet
> written the SQL for adding the new column in all dialects.  So I will
> withdraw this request.  I would rather experiment with process relative to
> some change with actual impact that warrants that kind of consideration.
>  I'll resubmit this once we get the process worked out.
>
> In the meantime, if Michigan goes to trunk, we'll have to apply a patch
> each time we adopt a new version of evalsys.
>
> Thanks.
>
> Jim
>
>
> On Jun 23, 2010, at 10:02 AM, Aaron Zeckoski wrote:
>
> > I think I would prefer we arrange a short meeting where Jim can take
> > us through the impact. I can be pretty flexible on times this week but
> > Lovemore might not be available (travel) so we might have to wait. I
> > don't think there is a need to rush anything right?
> > Does that seem ok?
> > -AZ
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 2:39 PM, Sean DeMonner <demonner at umich.edu>
> wrote:
> >> What else do we need to do?
> >>
> >> Jim,
> >> Per our discussion in Denver, I think we need to get positive
> confirmation
> >> from at least the four members of new PMC (of which you are one) before
> >> anyone checks in changes to trunk. I don't think a non-response within
> 48
> >> hours can or should be considered a green light for checking in changes.
> >> That said, I think the four members of that team need to be highly
> >> responsive -- if only to say, "I need more time to assess this change."
> If
> >> we don't get reasonable response times (and I'd leave it to that team to
> >> define "reasonable") then we've essentially locked up development with a
> >> slow moving committee which isn't a good thing either.
> >> I know we reviewed these changes in detail several months ago, and that
> >> you're eager to get them checked in, but I'd like to give our new
> process a
> >> chance.
> >>
> >> So, what do Rick, Lovemore and Aaron think of Jim's proposal?
> >> SMD.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On Jun 22, 2010, at 10:41 PM, Jim Eng wrote:
> >>
> >> Based on Sean's response, I guess I don't understand what process was
> >> approved.  I am submitting this change for approval even though we
> agreed on
> >> it a few months ago exactly because it was not merged at that time and
> we
> >> now have a more formal process.  So I am saying I would like to go ahead
> >> with the proposed change unless there are objections within 48 hours.  I
> am
> >> publishing it to the list as a notice of the proposed change and
> invitation
> >> for comment.  What else do we need to do?
> >> BTW, Matthew Jones reminded me that there is also a ddl change in this
> >> ticket.  I will provide sql for the database change.  The ticket already
> >> shows the changes in the sql for creation of the database tables.
> >> Jim
> >>
> >>
> >> On Jun 22, 2010, at 5:08 PM, Sean DeMonner wrote:
> >>
> >> Jim,
> >> At the BoF in Denver last week we discussed a new process for merging
> >> changes to trunk; excerpt from notes at http://typewith.me/rN96pc2gJ3 :
> >> --------------
> >> Proposal: Apache-style PMC for code changes to trunk (technical
> leadership).
> >> Members have veto power.
> >> Nominations: Jim Eng (UM), Aaron (Unicon), Rick (UMD), Lovemore (UCT).
> >> Output of the team: features that go in should be sent to the list as
> >> individual emails. Preferably before but definitely when the feature
> goes in
> >> -------------
> >> So let's follow our (new) process and see what that team has to say with
> >> regard to merging these changes.
> >> SMD.
> >>
> >>
> >> On Jun 22, 2010, at 4:54 PM, Jim Eng wrote:
> >>
> >> We discussed this several months ago with general agreement that it
> would be
> >> OK to merge some work done back in February to trunk.  The work is
> described
> >> here:
> >>
> >> http://jira.sakaiproject.org/browse/EVALSYS-861
> >>
> >> I thought I had merged it, but I just discovered it has not been merged.
> >>
> >> To review, this adds a member variable named "localSelector" to the
> >> EvalEvaluation class (along with a setter and getter) and it adds a
> column
> >> in the database for this property in the EVAL_EVALUATION table.  This
> makes
> >> it possible for institutions to set this column in some way (in a
> provider,
> >> for example, or in import code) and then use it to select evals and
> other
> >> entities for export later.  The rest of the EVALSYS codebase ignores
> this
> >> value.
> >>
> >> Michigan has had this change in production since February with no ill
> >> effects.  The JIRA ticket indicates that Maryland would like to use this
> as
> >> well, and that Maryland is interested in providing a UI for setting this
> >> value when creating or modifying an evaluation, but that work has not
> been
> >> done and is not part of the current proposal.
> >>
> >> As I said, we had approval of this a few months ago, but since the
> change
> >> was not merged to trunk at that time, I thought it would be prudent to
> >> announce it again and give 48 hours for comment before merging it to
> trunk.
> >>  So I will merge these changes to trunk unless there are objections
> before 5
> >> p.m. EDT Thursday.
> >>
> >> Thanks.
> >>
> >> Jim
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> ==========================================================
> >> Sean DeMonner, IT Senior Project Manager, CTools Implementation Group
> >> Digital Media Commons @ The Duderstadt Center, U-M      (734) 615-9765
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> SMD.
> >>
> >> ==========================================================
> >> Sean DeMonner, IT Senior Project Manager, CTools Implementation Group
> >> Digital Media Commons @ The Duderstadt Center, U-M      (734) 615-9765
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> evaluation mailing list
> >> evaluation at collab.sakaiproject.org
> >> http://collab.sakaiproject.org/mailman/listinfo/evaluation
> >>
> >> TO UNSUBSCRIBE: send email to
> evaluation-unsubscribe at collab.sakaiproject.org
> >> with a subject of "unsubscribe"
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Aaron Zeckoski - Software Engineer - http://tinyurl.com/azprofile
> >
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> evaluation mailing list
> evaluation at collab.sakaiproject.org
> http://collab.sakaiproject.org/mailman/listinfo/evaluation
>
> TO UNSUBSCRIBE: send email to
> evaluation-unsubscribe at collab.sakaiproject.org with a subject of
> "unsubscribe"
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://collab.sakaiproject.org/pipermail/evaluation/attachments/20100623/b8f45b14/attachment.html 