• Share
  • Email
  • Embed
  • Like
  • Save
  • Private Content
Community Source: A Concept Whose Time Has Come
 

Community Source: A Concept Whose Time Has Come

on

  • 388 views

 

Statistics

Views

Total Views
388
Views on SlideShare
388
Embed Views
0

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
0
Comments
0

0 Embeds 0

No embeds

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

    Community Source: A Concept Whose Time Has Come Community Source: A Concept Whose Time Has Come Presentation Transcript

    • Kuali: A Community Source Initiative A Concept Whose Time has Come Barry Walsh : Indiana University
    • Software Sourcing Options…
      • Control of destiny
      • Leverage of $$
      • Ecology of innovation
      • By, For and Of HE
      • ???
      “ Borrow” Risks Benefits 1970-80s 1990 2000 Build Build or Buy Build, Buy, or 2010
    • Early Successes
    • Common Open Source Attributes Coordinated? Developer Driven Individual Effort Dominates
    • Community Source Projects “ Community source describes a model for the purposeful coordinating of work in a community. It is based on many of the principles of open source development efforts, but community source efforts rely more explicitly on defined roles, responsibilities, and funded commitments by community members than some open source development models.” … . from www.sakaiproject.org
    • Community Source Projects “ Community source describes a model for the purposeful coordinating of work in a community. It is based on many of the principles of open source development efforts, but community source efforts rely more explicitly on defined roles, responsibilities, and funded commitments by community members than some open source development models.” … . from www.sakaiproject.org
    • Some Attributes of Community Source Coordinated Subject Matter Experts Tendered Resources Date Driven Development Shared Governance
    • Formation: Participants’ Volunteer Modes Institutional Institutional/Individual Individual Our focus today Middleware (Apache) Application (Kuali/Sakai) Operating System (Linux)
    • Three Critical Stages Harmonious Execution Formation Ongoing Support Scope Funding Governance
    • Formation: Formation
    • Formation: Choose Partners Judiciously
      • Like-minded Institutions
        • Shared vision
          • Functionally
          • Technically
          • Ya gotta WANNA!!
        • Synchronized institutional clocks
          • Within reason
      • Long term commitment:
        • Beyond Project?
      • Tolerance for ambiguity
    • Formation: Creating the resources
      • Defined Contributions
        • Cash or Tendered Resources
        • Tendered to Board
        • For Duration of Project
      • Qualified Resources
        • As Judged by Peers
          • Functional
          • Technical
      • Grants
    • Harmonious Execution Harmonious Execution
    • Harmonious Execution: Personal
      • Good behavior begets good behavior.
        • If you seed the core development team with good, well behaved people... they attract good, well behaved people.
        • The weaklings and bullies just don't fit in and don't hang around.
        • Likewise, well-behaved commercial partners set high bar for future behavior of commercial partners.
      … Carl Jacobson
    • Harmonious Execution: Personal/Team Dynamics
      • CSFs:
      • Park ego at door; pick up on way out!
        • Most of the smart people on the project work somewhere else!
      • Bring brain!
      • High Emotional IQ…Good Thing!!
        • Superstar developers do not always make the best players here; but…it is not always an issue
      • Aretha Franklin…….R.E.S.P.E.C.T!
        • For other’s qualities
        • For other’s campus or personal cultures
      • It’s a Team Sport!
        • “ Individuals” need not apply!!
    • Harmonious Execution: Logistical
      • Co-location is optimal but unlikely
      • Don’t skimp on the F2F opportunities
      • Always-on Video
      • Virtual-Meeting Software
        • Webex, Breeze, LiveMeeting, etc.
        • Prototype sharing/demonstration
      • Collaborative Software
        • Sakai, JIRA, Confluence etc.
      • Time Zones!!!
      • Animal House!!
    • Harmonious Execution: Overhead
      • Remote sites
        • Team makeup/leadership
        • Work Allocation
      • Time-Zones
    • Harmonious Execution: Technical
      • Usually Not Research Projects
      • Sometimes span multiple years
      • Standards
        • Architectural
        • Platform
        • Development
        • Version Control
        • Repository
      • Balance Agility and Execution
    • Ongoing Support Ongoing Support Scope Funding Governance
    • Ongoing Support: Funding
      • Community Source Requires Defined, Tendered Resources
      • Commercial partners  A good thing
        • Long term sustenance?
      • A "grant-funded project" is different from an "open source" project.
    • Ongoing Support: Scope
      • Scope Creep
        • A grant is a contract and an agreement to accomplish something.
        • If the grant money was received to "paint it red" and the community wants to "paint it white"... it will be red as long as the grant is driving the bus.
          • When the community process kicks in, they can paint it white.
      … Carl Jacobson
    • Ongoing Support: Scope--The Rules of the Game Scope Time Resources The Reality Triangle You May Pick Any Two I Get the Other ☺
    • Ongoing Support: Governance
      • Strong community is more valuable than strong governance.
        • Early stages: a little more hands-on?
        • Later: Zen?
      • "Inclusive" is better than "exclusive“
        • largest possible community;
        • accept free-riders;
        • welcome commercial partners;
      • Open-open licensing encourages inclusion and therefore the largest possible community.
      … Carl Jacobson
    • Governance Evolution Founding Partners Investment Partners Community Partners
    • Indiana: Enterprise Systems…today
      • Vended
      • Student (PSFT)
      • HR/Payroll (PSFT)
      • Room Sched (Ad Astra)
      • Physical Plant (MMS)
      • Imaging (OnBase)
      • Home grown
      • Course Management
      • Financials
      • Portal
      • Workflow
      • Decision Support
      • Research Admin
    • Enterprise Systems…future
      • Vended
      • Student (PSFT)
      • HR/Payroll (PSFT)
      • Room Sched (Ad Astra)
      • Physical Plant (MMS)
      • Community Source
      • E-Portfolio (OSP)
      • Course Management (Sakai)
      • Financials (Kuali)
      • Research (Kuali)
      • Endowment (Kuali)
      • Workflow (Kuali)
      • Portal (u-Portal)
      • Imaging? (Fedora)
      • Decision Support?
      It’s not about religion.
    • Future? General Ledger Chart of Accounts Grants Management Accounts Receivable Purchasing/AP Capital Assets Workflow Budget Construction Today’s Integrated Financial Suite Standards Based Core Technologies Modular SOA
    • http://Kualiproject.org .
      • Kuali Financial Systems :
        • Community Source
        • Comprehensive financial information system for higher education
        • Any Carnegie Class institution, from Community College to R1 institutions
        • Indiana University is 8 campuses
          • 2 R1 campuses
          • 6 smaller campuses
        • Seal of Approval of NACUBO
          • ‘ Advocatis Diablo’
    • What is it all about? New System Design ? Indiana Financial System Refactor The Technology Limited Enhancements Defined by Functional Council
    • Why are we doing this?
      • FIS functionality
      • 10 more years.
      • FIS technology base shaky
        • 12 year old technology (2 tier C/S)
        • Vendor support ????
        • Loss of Control ?
    • IU’s Options ?
      • Retooling the FIS alone
        • Time
        • Ongoing support and costs
      • Buy PSFT Financials?
      • Partner with like minded colleagues
        • Share costs
        • Get enhancements faster
      • Others have looked at the FIS
        • Mostly positive.
        • Several are investing in Kuali.
      • For reasons ranging from cost to control of destiny, collaborative efforts such as this are becoming more common among our peer institutions.
    • Project Costs
      • $7.4 m total project cost
      • 72+ person-year effort
      • Core partners:
        • $500,000  $2,000,000,
          • depending on Size and Carnegie Class
      • >$4,400,000 from Founding Partners
        • Cash or tendered personnel resources
      • March, 2005: $2.5m grant from the Andrew W. Mellon Foundation
    • Founding Partners
      • Currently have Six Institutional Founding Partners
      • NACUBO is also a Founding Partner
      • rSmart is a Founding Partner
    • What are we actually going to do?
      • Client Server J2EE platform
        • Modular architecture; SOA?
      • Work being done by Founding Partners and other approved investing partners
      • At IU, it will be delivered through OneStart/uPortal
      • Kuali will work with the Kuali Enterprise Workflow© engine.
    • Timeline
      • Project calls for 36 months to do the development.
        • Phase I: Baseline system in 12 months
        • Phase II: Full System within 27 months
        • Phase III and beyond: Within 36 months
          • Enhancements not done in initial project
    • Governance
      • Kuali Board
        • Voting member from each Institution
        • NACUBO and rSmart
        • Chair from Indiana
        • Extended Board
      • Project Manager
        • Developers from each Institution
      • Functional Council
        • Members from each Institution
        • NACUBO and rSmart
        • Subcommittees
    • Accomplishments to date
      • Core Partners have tendered their pledged resources
      • Several Functional Council Retreats
        • Refine requirements
        • Prioritize enhancements in scope
      • Several Technical Council Retreats
        • Define overall technical architecture
          • J2EE, SOA, XML
        • Create Kuali Nervous System
      • Developers have created the first working transactions
      • Purchasing/AP modules already in production at IU
    • Next Steps
      • Continued Functional Council meetings
        • SME’s working with development teams
        • Continuous prioritization and iterative development
      • Six development teams working on specific functionality
        • Initial release will be deployed in Q2, 2006
      • Kuali Research Administration (KRA)
      • Kuali Endowment Module (KEM)
    • Questions?