Members present: westei, tkurz, sschaffert, jfrank, wikier ---------------- Meeting summary: ----------------
1. Preface 2. ldclient j. sschaffert writes until tonight tests for the linked data client modules (sschaffert, 2) >. open a Jira issue for providing the ldclient library as a separate Java library (sschaffert, 2) 3. ldcache 4. admin ui 5. user management 6. branding 7. branding t. call for logo requirements (wikier, 7) 8. user management 9. search 10. aob m. https://code.google.com/p/lmf/issues/list (wikier, 10) -------- Actions: -------- - sschaffert writes until tonight tests for the linked data client modules (sschaffert, 09:11:45) - open a Jira issue for providing the ldclient library as a separate Java library (sschaffert, 09:15:44) - call for logo requirements (wikier, 09:30:35) IRC log follows: # 1. Preface # 09:08:29 [wikier]: ok, let's start 09:08:30 [sschaffert]: my topics: ldclient, ldcache 09:08:31 [wikier]: topics? 09:08:44 [wikier]: also admin ui 09:08:54 [sschaffert]: branding 09:08:55 [wikier]: branding 09:08:59 [wikier]: yes 09:08:59 [sschaffert]: (your mail) 09:09:07 [jfrank]: search 09:09:10 [wikier]: ok 09:09:14 [tkurz]: user moudle 09:09:37 [wikier]: sschaffert: start with the libs 09:09:37 [sschaffert]: ok, enough for 20 minutes:) # 2. ldclient # 09:10:14 [sschaffert]: so what I have finished yesterday night is moving out all linked data client functionality into a separate package 09:10:22 [sschaffert]: well, many packages 09:10:23 [sschaffert]: very modular 09:10:30 [sschaffert]: there is 09:10:44 [sschaffert]: ldclient-api, ldclient-core, and ldclient-provider-X 09:11:01 [sschaffert]: where X implements the provider for a certain kind of data, e.g. rdf, youtube, vimeo, mediawiki 09:11:07 [sschaffert]: and so on 09:11:14 [sschaffert]: I have moved all old implementations to the new architecture 09:11:24 [sschaffert]: work for today: 09:11:45 [sschaffert]: #action sschaffert writes until tonight tests for the linked data client modules 09:12:29 [sschaffert]: tomorrow I will do the same with the caching components of lmf-ldcache 09:12:29 [sschaffert]: I hope it only takes one day 09:12:39 [sschaffert]: and then everything can be integrated on Monday 09:12:44 [wikier]: so many artifacts right now xD 09:12:59 [sschaffert]: yes, this is a certain dilemma 09:13:14 [sschaffert]: flexibility vs. number of artifacts 09:13:29 [westei]: flexibility > number of artifacts 09:13:37 [wikier]: imo not a big issue 09:13:44 [sschaffert]: no, not with maven 09:13:45 [sschaffert]: I was just concerned that 09:13:52 [wikier]: just needs proper documentation and build management 09:14:00 [sschaffert]: the ldclient library could also be interesting for people not yet using Maven 09:14:22 [westei]: you can provide a ldclient-all jar 09:14:22 [sschaffert]: and there should be a kind of packaging for them where they simply use the ldclient library as a single jar 09:14:37 [sschaffert]: westei: yes and no 09:14:37 [sschaffert]: yes for the code 09:14:44 [sschaffert]: problem is the java services 09:14:52 [sschaffert]: because these files need to be merged somehow 09:15:00 [sschaffert]: so the META-INF/services 09:15:07 [westei]: thats easy 09:15:22 [westei]: you can do that with a maven assembly descriptor 09:15:23 [sschaffert]: but this is for another day, we should just keep it in mind (maybe make a Jira issue) 09:15:44 [sschaffert]: #action open a Jira issue for providing the ldclient library as a separate Java library 09:16:07 [sschaffert]: another short disclaimer: 09:16:07 [wikier]: I don see it as a priority right now 09:16:22 [wikier]: something for the future, I agree, but not a priority 09:16:39 [sschaffert]: yes, but it is the "last step" for community adoption, otherwise we will get stuck in the problem of all OSGi-based frameworks 09:16:44 [wikier]: the priority is the last release 09:16:44 [jfrank]: maybe for 3.5 09:16:45 [sschaffert]: only experts 09:17:07 [wikier]: I agree 09:17:22 [wikier]: but let's put in "something it'd be nice to have" 09:17:29 [sschaffert]: I would like to have usability / easy deployment of our technologies as a "key performance indicator" :) 09:17:37 [wikier]: right 09:17:44 [wikier]: but step by step 09:17:46 [sschaffert]: yes 09:17:52 [sschaffert]: ok, let me add the disclaimer 09:17:54 [wikier]: we could do it for the first marmotta release 09:18:14 [sschaffert]: I realised it will not be so easy to use other data models than Sesame as a backend for the ldclient 09:18:29 [sschaffert]: the reason is mainly that most data providers involve parsing 09:18:37 [sschaffert]: one way or the other 09:18:47 [sschaffert]: and as soon as you need a parser you are bound to a framework 09:19:08 [sschaffert]: so to make the client framework independent requires much more thinking 09:19:14 [sschaffert]: it is not as easy as with ldpath 09:19:37 [sschaffert]: and that's it, not a priority for now anyways 09:19:44 [sschaffert]: I will today write the tests for the different functionalities 09:20:02 [sschaffert]: and then the ldclient library can be used even outside the LMF to access any resources it supports 09:20:07 [wikier]: ok # 3. ldcache # 09:20:22 [wikier]: yes, the goal is quite clear 09:20:37 [sschaffert]: not much to be said 09:20:46 [sschaffert]: I will start doing the same with the caching functionality tomorrow 09:20:52 [sschaffert]: and hope to finish it also tomorrow 09:20:59 [sschaffert]: as discussed in the last meetings 09:21:01 [wikier]: ok 09:21:22 [sschaffert]: goal is to be able to use it independently of the LMF 09:21:37 [sschaffert]: for now stacking it into a Sesame SAIL stack 09:21:52 [sschaffert]: and that's it 09:21:55 [wikier]: good 09:22:14 [wikier]: tkurz: proceed with your ui-related topics 09:22:16 [sschaffert]: in the end, we will have a modular system of ldclient, ldcache, ldpath that can be combined via Sesame SAILs as needed 09:22:22 [sschaffert]: yes 09:22:22 [sschaffert]: I am done # 4. admin ui # 09:22:29 [wikier]: time runs.... 09:22:45 [tkurz]: I finished the admin ui for the core module 09:23:14 [tkurz]: now I will reset the layout for all the other modules 09:23:29 [tkurz]: that's it ;) 09:23:38 [wikier]: I like the new style 09:23:40 [wikier]: but... 09:23:59 [wikier]: do we want to completely loose the SW colors? 09:24:14 [tkurz]: mhh. in the lmf they are in the logo 09:24:44 [tkurz]: and the colors are not good for layouting a whole page 09:24:53 [wikier]: maybe not so important 09:24:54 [wikier]: ok 09:25:02 [tkurz]: maybe we can add the cube somewhere? 09:25:07 [sschaffert]: maybe it would not be so bad to adopt the colour scheme of Stanbol in the futurew 09:25:16 [sschaffert]: even IntelliJ has it now, so there is a trend :) 09:25:37 [sschaffert]: but not for now 09:25:45 [wikier]: ok 09:25:52 [sschaffert]: at the moment, priority should be easy to use interface 09:25:53 [wikier]: +1 09:25:53 [tkurz]: so. the colors can be changed within an hour 09:25:54 [sschaffert]: supporting the admin user 09:26:07 [sschaffert]: and 09:26:07 [wikier]: that means, next topic 09:26:07 [sschaffert]: supporting the developer 09:26:15 [sschaffert]: yes # 5. user management # 09:26:46 [wikier]: not sure if I agree with tkurz about merging user management into core 09:27:07 [wikier]: [ok] # 6. branding # # 7. branding # 09:27:24 [sschaffert]: ok 09:27:34 [sschaffert]: saw your mail and forwarded it to Daniela 09:27:35 [wikier]: as far as I checked, we can feel free to use the logo 09:27:49 [sschaffert]: I will sit with her on Monday to discuss the different versions of the logo 09:28:02 [wikier]: ok 09:28:17 [wikier]: SVG and XCF/PSD would be nice 09:28:17 [jfrank]: will it be allowed to use the logo flipped? 09:28:19 [sschaffert]: maybe we can until then collect concrete requirements for sizes, colours and formats 09:28:33 [sschaffert]: whatever you want and Daniela agrees on :) 09:28:47 [wikier]: :-) 09:29:09 [wikier]: a monochrome version would be also nice 09:29:09 [sschaffert]: but why would anyone want to use it flipped? the text is hard to read except for nerds ;-) 09:29:24 [wikier]: xD 09:29:32 [sschaffert]: ok, no need to discuss it now, maybe collect it at the Jira issue 09:29:47 [sschaffert]: now I need to leave ... :-( 09:29:54 [sschaffert]: so cu :) 09:29:55 [wikier]: ok 09:30:02 [wikier]: cu sschaffert 09:30:24 [wikier]: I'll call for requirements in dev@ 09:30:35 [wikier]: #action call for logo requirements 09:30:41 [tkurz]: okay 09:30:47 [wikier]: ok, back to user # 8. user management # 09:31:10 [wikier]: as I said, not sure if I agree with tkurz about merging user management into core 09:31:19 [tkurz]: I want to integrate the access management filter into the core 09:31:26 [tkurz]: not the whole user management 09:31:40 [jfrank]: so the "security" part 09:31:47 [jfrank]: not the "user" part 09:31:54 [tkurz]: yes 09:32:09 [wikier]: what we should have in core is a user/security component 09:32:24 [wikier]: which could allow change the auth mechanism 09:32:39 [wikier]: form instance a web session 09:32:47 [tkurz]: yes. and the mechanism should be extedable by modules 09:32:47 [wikier]: but potentially others 09:32:48 [wikier]: right 09:32:49 [jfrank]: that's currently in "security" 09:32:54 [wikier]: ah, ok 09:33:02 [jfrank]: extensions are possible 09:33:12 [jfrank]: currently: local db and ldap 09:33:34 [wikier]: why not keep it there? 09:34:47 [tkurz]: mhh. the idea was that it is absolutely necessary in any use case 09:35:03 [tkurz]: but we can also keep it as it is 09:35:47 [tkurz]: my impression was, that we had many problems with that in the past 09:35:47 [wikier]: I don't have the details for voting this 09:35:54 [wikier]: you guys decide 09:36:04 [tkurz]: so a simplification might help 09:36:25 [westei]: How is security implemented? 09:36:41 [westei]: RESTful services or on component level? 09:36:47 [jfrank]: basically: regex on the request url 09:36:54 [jfrank]: REST only 09:37:09 [tkurz]: yes. and there is a very strange configuration 09:37:42 [wikier]: simplification would be fine, yes 09:38:02 [tkurz]: the problem was, that it does not always work as expected 09:38:09 [wikier]: maintenance is always a priority 09:38:11 [wikier]: tkurz: for instance? 09:38:24 [wikier]: just to get the details 09:38:40 [westei]: The other possibility would be to add Java Permissions on Component level (e.g. Allow to query a Graph) 09:38:47 [tkurz]: the problem is, that the mechanism is not transparent 09:38:54 [jfrank]: imho: protecting the REST interface is core business. 09:39:17 [jfrank]: and that's what we have currently 09:40:02 [westei]: But REST could be sometimes hard, as the same datasource could be mapped to different URIs 09:40:02 [jfrank]: @westei: true, but thats for the future 09:40:24 [tkurz]: Maybe we can keep it as it is but with more information, why access is denied 09:40:39 [tkurz]: otherwise it is not configurable without debigging mode ;) 09:41:24 [tkurz]: maybe we can solve the problem with a better UI 09:41:25 [wikier]: ok, I would suggest 09:41:32 [wikier]: keep it as it is 09:41:41 [wikier]: identify the issue that tkurz commented 09:41:54 [wikier]: and find proper solutions for next releases 09:42:17 [tkurz]: okay. I think about it until the next meeting 09:42:17 [wikier]: of couse, whatever that could be fix it now, being sure no lateral effects, fo rit for 2.6 09:42:18 [jfrank]: don't think that will work... 09:42:48 [wikier]: I'd like to have the actual issues described 09:42:59 [wikier]: maybe we should start a new implementation for scratch 09:43:07 [wikier]: I don't know... 09:43:14 [wikier]: s/for/from 09:44:08 [jfrank]: should we elaborate on that now or in a separate round? 09:44:37 [wikier]: +1 09:44:40 [tkurz]: okay. I will test it today and maybe will find a simple solution for now 09:45:14 [wikier]: ok # 9. search # 09:45:44 [wikier]: jfrank: go ahead 09:46:07 [jfrank]: search is back on. 09:46:45 [jfrank]: currently i'm working on the issue with deleted cores that are re-appearing after restart 09:47:08 [jfrank]: seems line an error/misunderstanding in the configuration 09:47:16 [jfrank]: (ConfigurationService) 09:47:37 [wikier]: cool 09:47:46 [wikier]: we have that issue in all scenarios 09:48:24 [jfrank]: the problem is the CompositeConfiguration we are using, together with the List of available/enabled cores. 09:48:44 [wikier]: jfrank: could be related with lmf issue #122 ? 09:48:53 [wikier]: https://code.google.com/p/lmf/issues/detail?id=122 09:49:15 [wikier]: I think westei resolved it in a different way in Stanbol 09:49:37 [wikier]: (sorry, not a solr-expert) 09:49:52 [jfrank]: indirectly. 09:50:07 [jfrank]: more details now or f2f? 09:50:15 [wikier]: f2f 09:50:16 [wikier]: good # 10. aob # 09:50:30 [wikier]: aob? 09:51:00 [tkurz]: yes I am 09:51:15 [tkurz]: bit nob ;) 09:51:37 [wikier]: what? 09:51:59 [tkurz]: no other business 09:52:14 [wikier]: yes, but what? 09:53:07 [wikier]: go ahead, tkurz 09:53:37 [wikier]: feel free to use #topic ;-) 09:53:59 [tkurz]: I said that I do NOT have aob ;) 09:54:07 [wikier]: ah, ok 09:54:14 [wikier]: ok, I have one 09:54:30 [wikier]: please, take a look to lmf issues 09:54:30 [wikier]: #link https://code.google.com/p/lmf/issues/list 09:54:45 [wikier]: to fix whatever could be fixed/closed for 2.6 09:55:07 [wikier]: that's it for me
