Child pages
  • 2009-03-02 Conference Call

Versions Compared

Key

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

Meeting minutes for March 2, 2009

  1. Sakai/OSP 2.6 Issues and Status
    • 2.6 QA Testing Status. Pete is looking for update on the blocker, SAK-15579. When Beth logged in as portfolio owner, it works, but breaks when someone else uses it. Noah will try to look at it.
    • SAK-15348 Imported Matrices do not retain links to global forms. Chris Mauer is looking at this. Marked as critical. Problem evident in 2.5, so maybe shouldn't be critical. Beth resetting it to major. Only seems to be reproducible in certain environments.
    • SAK-15276 Edit links appears for all reviewers/evaluators on feedback/evaluation, though they cannot edit. Assigned to Noah.
    • SAK-15541 Evaluators from different groups click on evaluations and get a 500 error. Unassigned. Beth will look at.
    • SAK-15540 Matrix in "Preview" status is unavailable to users. Beth will look at it.
    • SAK-15722 sort order does not remain consistent through 'previous' and 'next' page movements in the OSP evaluations tool. Should be easy to fix, but no takers.
    • SAK-15748 Add owner name information to form metadata for view renderer use. The idea is that when you make a view renderer, you can display the uid, displayName, and email address. Is not displayed in standard view, so blind reviews are unaffected.
    • Additional JIRAs: SAK-15734, SAK-15736 Null Pointer Exceptions. Beth is having trouble reproducing either of these. There is a backlog of bugs that have been fixed but not merged to 2.6. We need people to help verify the 8 bugs on the list that Beth made. Sean will verify them.
  2. Sakai/OSP 2.7 and beyond Development Status

Jan Smith posted minutes from the last meeting under Community Ideas for Future OSP Releases. Last week three ideas figured prominently: 1. Tagging with goals, especially with groups transcending sites and the ability to link to more things than just matrices. 2. Rethinking what matrices and wizards do. 3. Social networking

Where is there money? What is the largest critical mass we can get together to actually do something? Portfolio-related vignettes page has some ideas related to goals. Three items there have to do with meta-tagging, and two with user experience. If we are going after grant money, we should be thinking in terms of a new vision for 3.0. Preferably something more flexible than the current system. Ros Orgel will find out what happened with the grant proposal that was put together by Bret Eynon, Melissa Peet, and Darren Cambridge, but it may not have been very Sakai-oriented. John Moore and Eddie Watson at VA Tech would be good to talk to in order to understand the Mellon perspective.

LaGuardia has a decree from on high that they are to use Blackboard, which is hindering their ePortfolio work. Noah Botimer pointed out that the new IMS work should make integration with Blackboard feasible, allowing for mash-up of content, plugging in modules, etc. Blackboard and Pearson are leading the initiative.

Steve Foehr from RINET talked about moving from a K-12 perspective to K-20, where goals mapped in school can be carried over into the university. They are working with URI and Rhode Island College. Rhode Island College is interested in Sakai as a means to meet their accreditation needs. They have used a system called True Outcomes that had some issues (and is pretty much at the end of its life), but one of its strengths was its reporting system.

Jan noted that many new people looking at Sakai are particularly interested in Goal Management, but they all have different approaches. Noah pointed out that we know a great deal more about tagging and Goal Management than we did even a couple years ago. What solutions are out there? Has anyone come up with a solution that meets our needs? We should do a survey of current solutions: IDEAL, Task Stream, Chalk and Wire, Angel, Desire2Learn.

Regarding Sakai 3.0, it is important for the people working on 3.0 to know that we exist and are thinking about future directions. We should write up a list of things that should be met in 3.0 and make a project plan for it. What makes us the same, what makes us different (e.g., out permissions)? We should describe what we have and what we want for the future in ways that others can understand. We should cross list the write-ups that Jan will be posting on Community Ideas for Future OSP Releases with the vignettes page, and link to both from the standing agenda page.

Mark Zaldivar at VA Tech may be taking stewardship of the Goal Management tool. It would be good to get a developer from VA Tech on the call.