Date: Thursday, 13 October 2011
Time: 1:00PM Eastern US (contact MichaelFiedler if you'd like to participate)
The Automation meetings alternate times each meeting to accomodate the global team.
Agenda
* Reoccurring agenda items:
* Main agenda items:
- Comments on high level scenarios.
- Scenario ownership proposal
- Move each scenario to its own Wiki page
- Workgroup owner for each scenario
- Owners begin providing initial details for workgroup discussion
- Review data linking scenarios
- Previous Action Items:
- Next meetings:
- Oct 20
- Continue scenario development
Minutes
- Attending
- Michael Fiedler, Charles Rankin, Vaibhav Srivastava, Pramod Chandoria, Kevin Doyle, Steve Speicher, Scott Fairbrother, Robert Elves, Lucas Panjer, Bill Higgins, Sheehan Anderson, Eric Bordeau, John Arwe, Paul McMahan?
- Scenario Ownership
- Call for scenario owners will be sent to the list. Contact MichaelFiedler to volunteer.
- Responsible for driving scenario details and scenario documentation on the AutomationScenarios page
- Review of Build and Test tool integration scenario
- Most questions posed on this page have answers.
- Issues around project associations are implementation specific. Service Provider specifies the scope of artifact and query coverage.
- Issues around notification will be discussed later as part of the notification "sub-scenario"
- Relationships
- FROM quality management tool artifacts TO automation (build) results, not vice versa.
- Need to relate automations to each other - relatedTo from one automation plan to another or one result to another.
- General discussion on the "automation pipleline"
- What triggers automation? Could be scheduled (build) or triggered externally (change in environment, common component, shared prerequisite, test case, etc).
- Need for quality feedback loop in automation - determine the quality of the automation result
- Important when automations are chained....quality approval or quality criteria met could be a condition for executing the next automation plan
- General discussion on notifications/query
- Agreement to understand scenario needs at a high level before talking about details
- General discussion on contributions in automation results
- Need to understand everyone's possible contribution types (files, links, etc) and determine commonality
- Determine how specific or generic the spec needs to be in this area...Is name/type/link to payload sufficient? should all types be defined a priori.
- Review of Basic Automation Result linking
- Scenarios are from an automation result consumers perspective
- Connection scenario should be elaborated in terms of the general OSLC connection scenarios (interacting with catalogs, service providers, etc).
- In general, these scenarios were consistent with the Build/Test scenario in terms of needed artifacts and attributes
- General discussion on roles
- "Release Engineer"/Automation author
- Automation consumer. # Consumers >> # Authors
- Automation Agents
Next Meeting
- 20 October
- Discuss Manual Execution, result contribution and notification scenarios. Agent scenarios as well if there is time.
This topic: Main
> WebHome >
AutomationHome >
AutomationMeetings > AutomationMeetings20111006
Topic revision: r3 - 06 Oct 2011 - 20:55:00 -
MichaelFiedler