Sakai Development Process

      Michael Korcuska
         July 8, 2009
Agenda
• A bit of history
• The proposed process
• The process applied
  • 2.7 & 3.x
• Nominations for product council
• H...
A bit of history
• Inputs
  •   Community Survey
  •   Selected Interviews
  •   Open Source Comparison Projects
  •   Pro...
Survey & Interviews
• 50+ Organizational Responses
• 150+ Individual Responses
• About a dozen 30-60 minute phone calls
  ...
Community Wants
• Clear product vision & direction
• More communication from Foundation
• Roadmap that allows campus advoc...
Comparisons
Ways of Getting Work Done
• Organic – Contributors participate in the community
  based on personal/local interests and pr...
Product Life Cycle
Community




                                              Major Product Changes
• Generate new ideas
• Try new technolog...
Product Development
• Structuring of work in this phase is key
• Projects probably need
   •   Project management
   •   P...
Product Council
• Authority:
  • Decide what is in the official release
• How:
  • Based on objective criteria as much as ...
Product Council
• Qualifications:
   • A broad understanding of the Sakai product
   • The ability to advocate for the nee...
Changes
• What’s the same?
   •   Open development process
   •   Low barrier to entry for R&D projects
   •   Independent...
Independent projects
• Contrib projects that don’t intend to become part of the main
  release (e.g. Melete)
• Desire to e...
Product Council
•   Nate Angell (rSmart)
•   Noah Botimer (Michigan)
•   Eli Cochran (Berkeley)
•   Michael Feldstein (Ora...
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

Sakai Development Process

629 views

Published on

Update on the Sakai Development Process

Published in: Technology, Business
0 Comments
1 Like
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total views
629
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
4
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
29
Comments
0
Likes
1
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Sakai Development Process

  1. 1. Sakai Development Process Michael Korcuska July 8, 2009
  2. 2. Agenda • A bit of history • The proposed process • The process applied • 2.7 & 3.x • Nominations for product council • How to get started
  3. 3. A bit of history • Inputs • Community Survey • Selected Interviews • Open Source Comparison Projects • Project Goals exercise • 2-day retreat in February • Post retreat work • Much email/phone follow up
  4. 4. Survey & Interviews • 50+ Organizational Responses • 150+ Individual Responses • About a dozen 30-60 minute phone calls • Conducted by facilitator (Kim Thanos) • Overall Result • Sense of overall stability • Trust in Sakai board • Want to spend more time on community Sakai • Believe that Sakai will be the best platform
  5. 5. Community Wants • Clear product vision & direction • More communication from Foundation • Roadmap that allows campus advocates to effectively communicate with stakeholders • Project structure that attracts sufficient resources and uses them effectively • More input from functional experts & designers • Allow diverse types participation • Large and small, Formal and informal, Institutional and individual
  6. 6. Comparisons
  7. 7. Ways of Getting Work Done • Organic – Contributors participate in the community based on personal/local interests and priorities. It is the responsibility of the individual to communicate and request broader contribution. • Coordinated – Community structures actively seek to identify and align common contributions. Unmet needs are identified to leaders to encourage investment. • Managed – Resources are committed to achieve a defined set of deliverables. Central authority determines priorities.
  8. 8. Product Life Cycle
  9. 9. Community Major Product Changes • Generate new ideas • Try new technologies • Prove desirability • Create dev team/plan • Reduce dev risks Product Council • Finish building • Test • Document
  10. 10. Product Development • Structuring of work in this phase is key • Projects probably need • Project management • Project schedule and plan • Functional leadership • UX (including accessibility and i18n) • Multiple organizations involved • Exceptions possible • K2 using Apache-style management successfully Key: Ability to predictably deliver quality product
  11. 11. Product Council • Authority: • Decide what is in the official release • How: • Based on objective criteria as much as possible • Open process and document decision-making • Also: • Provide guidance to incubation projects who are wondering what they need to do to make the release
  12. 12. Product Council • Qualifications: • A broad understanding of the Sakai product • The ability to advocate for the needs within his/her area of expertise and maintain a broad view of community and product needs • Demonstrated commitment to engage with and contribute to the community • Expertise in more than one aspect of the product • User experience, including accessibility and usability • Teaching and learning • Research • Software design and architectures • Software production management (deploying and administering)
  13. 13. Changes • What’s the same? • Open development process • Low barrier to entry for R&D projects • Independent projects possible/encouraged • Small feature development remains the same • What is different? • Adherence to criteria from Incubation to Release • Managed process for development team(s) • Product Council to enforce criteria for making release • The idea of a maintenance group • R&D ≠ Contrib, Incubation ≠ Provisional, Product ≠ Core
  14. 14. Independent projects • Contrib projects that don’t intend to become part of the main release (e.g. Melete) • Desire to establish rating system for these tools • Current proposal too complex • My recommendation: 3 simple ratings (scale of 1-5) based on community consensus • UX • Does it follow Sakai conventions? • Is it accessible/localizable/documented? • Technical • Does it follow Sakai conventions? • Is it secure/scalable? • Support • How widely is it used in production? • Is anyone maintaining code?
  15. 15. Product Council • Nate Angell (rSmart) • Noah Botimer (Michigan) • Eli Cochran (Berkeley) • Michael Feldstein (Oracle) • Clay Fenlason (Georgia Tech & Sakai) • David Goodrum (Indiana) • John Lewis (Unicon) • Stephen Marquard (Cape Town) • John Norman (Cambridge) • Max Whitney (NYU)

×