Grouper Developers Forum

[Jessica Bibbee <>]

MACE-Dir-Groups Conference Call
July 13, 2005

*Participants*
Tom Barton, U. Chicago (Chair)
Minh Nguyen, Stanford U.

John Ballem, Brown U.

Shelley Henderson, USC

Blair Christensen, U. Chicago
Gary Brown, U. Bristol

Steve Olshansky, Internet2
Jessica Bibbee, Internet2 (scribe)

New *Action Items*

[AI] {Blair} will send out the javadoc for proposed API changes once it is complete.

[AI] {SteveO} will follow up with {Tom} regarding collaborative tools.

 

[AI] {Minh}, {Tom}, and {John} will work together to set up the UI, specifically addressing distribution.

 

[AI] {Tom} will email the {grouper-dev} list with the GAP URL.

 

Carry-over *Action Items*

[AI] {Blair} will send signatures of the new methods to the {grouper-dev} list, which will appear in the transition between v0.5.1 and v0.6. (4-May-05)

*Discussion*

{Tom} opened the discussion with progress made on the Grouper v0.6 release to ensure that no items have been overlooked. for specific diff highlights features in v0.6, please see the following: <http://anoncvs.internet2.edu/cgi-bin/viewcvs.cgi/grouper/doc/ROADMAP.diff?r1=1.15&r2=1.18&cvsroot=I2MI >.

 

The Group discussed topics such as the scope of namespaces and differentiation between simple and advanced searches within the UI. Ideally, there would be the flexibility to search against several fields, but temporarily it is important to have a working search method implemented for the nearing release. {Gary} suggested using a like-search approach over an exact-search, so as not to lose flexibility with case sensitivity. {Blair} is working on the list of fixes, which include smoothing any issues with the view privilege.

Revision of the API to have get- and set- commands will most likely wait to be included in 
v0.7. Making the methods conform to java and simplifying the API are on the to-do list, but will be pushed back for now. [AI] {Blair} will send out the javadoc for proposed API changes once it is complete.

The Group discussed ways of keeping record of the discussion that takes place parallel to changes within the API and UI. It would be useful for people to provide feedback, annotate comments, set up a database – capture the sequence of discussion. Depending on security restraints, both private and public resources could be made available. {SteveO} offered another possibility of using a beta version through Internet2. [AI] {SteveO} will follow up with {Tom} regarding collaborative tools.

 

{Tom} posed the question of whether the API and UI should be packaged as one, or separately – and what reasons would support that decision. {Gary} pointed out that the getting UI installed and built within Grouper is a prerequisite to having the API. {Minh} mentioned that as the documentations of the two are on different developmental paths, it would be natural to maintain separate packages. Signet has not promoted the API as a separate distribution, but it is included in the web application. Most of the feedback that {Minh} has received points to out-of-the-box solutions – most folks are not interested in doing their own compiling or database building. The Group should bear in mind these factors, and consider alternative approaches for incorporating the API and UI components.

 

{Tom} pushed for the v0.6 timeline to be clearly defined – including a code freeze by 22-Jul-05, which would allow time for {Gary} and {Blair} to then work on the UI code and refine accompanying documentation for packaging the API and UI (separately for now). In order for this to move forward, {Gary} stated a need for receiving feedback. At this point, installation and implementation is not easy, but this is where feedback would be crucial. There is missing documentation, and the question of whether to provide a means for customization, or whether to set up groups that people could work with. [AI] {Minh}, {Tom}, and {John} will work together to set up the UI, specifically addressing distribution.

 

{Tom} probed the Group for input on the exact naming of revision sequences – what is the possibility of pushing the current revisions under a v1.0 label? {Gary} observed a potential problem with jumping to a v1.0 before performance issues were fully explored and addressed. He noted that v1.0 should be at a production level state, ready to handle group math components. {John] concurred that Brown U. will need to have group math in order to enter production stage.

 

The last item covered in the call explored integration opportunities with uportal. {Tom} encouraged all to consider how the Group might leverage their efforts alongside uportal, who is doing work in the same space. How should the Group integrate with uportal folks, and about which topics? [AI] {Tom} will email the {grouper-dev} list with the GAP URL < http://jasigch.princeton.edu:9000/display/GAP/Home>. {Minh} wondered if Grouper would serve as another AuthZ mechanism. {Tom} offered 2 ways that Grouper and uportal might benefit from the other – 1) implement appropriate groups within uportal, so as to act as another provider, and 2) have a core groups functionality module with which to compare the API to. How can we extend the current model to enrich the integration model? Discussion will follow on the {grouper-dev} list, with links leading to the above wiki, if necessary.

 

The next MACE-Dir-Groups conference call will be on Wednesday, July 27, 2005 at 12pm ET.