Meeting: Further Tech Development
From Katrina Help Info
Date: TBD - postponed from Thursday - proposed Monday or Tuesday, 19-20 Sept 2005,
Time: TBD - proposed 7:00 pm CDT Duration: 1 hr
Topic: Deciding on which technology platform further development will continue
| Table of contents |
Scheduling
If you're interested in participating in this call, please include your name, dates, and blocks of time when you'll be available. If we can't find overlap, then a conference call may not be the way to go.
- Asun - available from Thursday, Monday, Tuesday from 3-10:00 pm CDT
- Anand 11:54, 14 Sep 2005 (EDT) I'm on UK time - will join if I can (re:Thursday) (can also do Monday Anand 10:40, 15 Sep 2005 (EDT))
- --[Paola (http://www.katrinahelp.info/wiki/index.php/Paola_Di_Maio)] 12:23, 14 Sep 2005 (EDT) I may not make the call, but will read the minutes with interest. I d like to discuss if we need a semantic model/rdf for all the projects. (re:Thursday)
- Mark Rauterkus available after 9 pm Eastern (re:Thursday).
- KaPingYee available on Monday after 5 pm PDT = 8 pm EDT.
- Wendy available pretty much any time but would prefer not 5:30-7 CST.
Background
Purpose of call
Timing
This call is either to discuss items for the short term, as in actions for the next week or two. Or, it is for the long haul and should have major impacts upon the coverage for the next major event, worldwide. What is it?
Scope
This call is either for a web site or two. Or, its for wide reaches into hundreds of sites? What is done at one site has little impact upon the overall endeavor. But, there is a need to talk about single sites too, as some sites are mission critical.
Evolution
This project needs an inventory of what's being deployed now. We have a start. Where are we at this point? There are excel spreadsheets. There are XML standards. There is KatriniaSafe that requires a web browser to be I.E.7.
We can't go from point A to point Z (yet alone C,D,E,) without knowing where we are on the map of what's being leveraged now. Give some judgements if that tool is capable for the long term too.
- Frankly, I'd love to see much more of the documentation posted to this wiki. This effort is going to be in vain unless its documentation comes into order and can stand on its own to newbies for the years to come.
Licenses, Open or Closed Philosophy
Some utilities are GPLed. Some, like Excel spreadsheets, require closed, proprietary tools.
The data feed from KatriniaList.net is open -- but it goes to non-open players.
- * Open Source Definition (http://www.opensource.org/docs/definition.php)
Maintainers matter most when you boil it down at the end of the day.
In the end, the ones who arrive and do the heavy lifting are going to be the ones that matter the most. If Salesforce folks maintain XYZ and want to do so and express a desire to do so for the future, then they get to itch their own itch. Others can either help them or move to other areas with other tools. The maintainers need to step forward in their ownership willingness and plunk down their own visions. These are the cornerstone playes for the venture. They need to be understood and those expressions need to be stated in public.
- One of the downsides of the volunteer effort so far seems to be the willingness to punt on first down, so to speak, with the arrival of the "big boys." FEMA, Red Cross, and others are sure to come when they sense sizzle. It isn't fun to be putting skin the the game and have the quarterbacks of the project take a knee or worse yet -- punt. For example, M$ had a paid engineer and that was a fatal blow, it seemed, from some. Big deal. The world is on our side. All the brain power from the big boys is but a spec next to what the human race can do and has proven to do. Google folks are not walking and talking to those in shelters now. The big boys are big -- and the people are way bigger.
- Hence, this is why the the player's commit is important, but not nearly as important as the projects' license philosophy. People can jump from side to side, but the license lingers and can be left for others to follow and pick-up the knowledge with the open source code.
- Hi-jacks of projects, slapping on copyright notices, hyper-lawyer speak, and buy-outs are all expected. They will happen.
- For what its worth, M$ has many open source products and efforts. So, if we build a better open-source people finder solution and M$ gets a contract from FEMA, M$ could pick-up our open-source efforts and run with it too.
Proposed Agenda
- What technology solutions need to be solved?
- In a bare sense, there are:
- 1) inputs,
- 2) outputs and,
- 3) holding containers.
- In a networked environment, there are:
- 1) inputs, and handoffs of inputs;
- 2) outputs and, handoffs of outputs;
- 3) holding containers and handoffs of outputs.
- In a bare sense, there are:
- Premise and foundation statements:
- Each site is going to use the tech widget of its choice to complete the associated job.
- Standards are critical in handoffs.
- Are we going to adopt rdf? do we need an dtd and xslt?
- Cooperation of mega players needs to be assured. Hence, mega players need to freely give up its information as well as accept information from other sources.
- Each developer is going to use what's in his tool box to scratch his/her own need. (i.e., perl, java, mysql, etc.)
- discuss platform options, pros/cons
- RData
- CivicCRM
- Salesforce.com
- others?
- make decision or schedule follow-up
- discuss transition strategy
- begin discussion of next features to develop
- peoplefinder/shelterfinder integration
- geospatial mapping
- update capability
- others?
- managing duplicates (this call or another?)
