Document Process Update

[Ivan R. Judson]

I've glanced over all of the documents tonight. Most of them are coming
along quite nicely. The two that look to me to need the most work are the
bridge server design and the certificate management design (I believe we
need a design document for the cert stuff since it's a complicated enough
subsystem that it warrants it). The existing design outline is a good start
at what needs to go into the design docs; I notice the bridge server doc
isn't using the template yet -- that needs to happen as well.

Again, I'd like to see all of these documents done by Friday morning so that
we can announce 2.1.2 Friday -- and the completion of these documents. The
goal of the current design documents is also to provide a good basis for our
next cycle, as such it should completely and accurately explain what's
happening in the current code base.

Thanks, 

--Ivan

PS -- Please do read and comment on documents via ag-dev, we'll all produce
better documents as a result.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-ag-dev at mcs.anl.gov 
> [mailto:owner-ag-dev at mcs.anl.gov] On Behalf Of Ivan R. Judson
> Sent: Tuesday, October 14, 2003 2:03 PM
> To: 'Robert Olson'; ag-dev at mcs.anl.gov
> Subject: RE: Document Process Update
> 
> 
> 
> I forgot to mention that we should all be reading and 
> commenting (via email) on each others docs so we can make 
> them high quality as fast as possible.
> 
> --Ivan
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Robert Olson [mailto:olson at mcs.anl.gov]
> > Sent: Tuesday, October 14, 2003 1:38 PM
> > To: judson at mcs.anl.gov; ag-dev at mcs.anl.gov
> > Subject: Re: Document Process Update
> > 
> > 
> > I think I'm up to date on manuals, given that:
> > 
> > I don't see what it means for cert mgmt and access control
> > documents to be 
> > merged; they address different topics, and
> > 
> > Right now, I think it's more important to make headway on
> > apps stuff for SC 
> > demos than to convert over the datastore doc from tex/pdf to 
> > word; when the 
> > programmer's manual activity gains traction I'll get it 
> > switched over, and 
> > will thus only have to reformat once.
> > 
> > --bob
> > 
> > At 05:07 PM 10/3/2003 -0500, Ivan R. Judson wrote:
> > 
> > >Howdy,
> > >
> > >We currently have a few types of documents:
> > >
> > >Architecture Documents (These should all be word docs, with visio)
> > >Design Documents       (These  should all be word docs, with visio)
> > >                              (Example Outline in
> > DesignOutline.doc and
> > >Template in AGDesign.dot)
> > >How-To Documents             (These should all be word docs)
> > >Implementation Notes   (These can be anything, they aren't 
> for public
> > >consumption really,
> > >                                 but remember, not everyone
> > has every
> > >tool...I don't have latex,
> > >                                 I do have pdf :-)
> > >Manuals              (These should all be in word)
> > >
> > >In order to close our last few issues on this cycle, I'd
> > like us to get
> > >our design documents in synch with our current code. In
> > order for that
> > >to happen, I'd like it if the following writing assignments were
> > >completed by the end of next week:
> > >
> > >Document                                Author  Action
> > >------------------------------------------------
> > >Virtual Venues Design           Ivan            Incorporate 
> > Event Service
> > >doc
> > >Venue Client Design             Susanne Incorporate Personal 
> > Node Design
> > >Venue Management Design         Susanne
> > >Data Store Design                       Eric
> > >Bridge Server Design            Tom
> > >Node Management Design          Tom             Incorporate 
> > Personal Node
> > >Design
> > >Certificate Management          Bob             Merge 
> > Certificate Management
> > >and Access Control Notes
> > >Datastore Client                        Bob             
> > Converted to word,
> > >to be part of future programmers manual.
> > >Toolkit Core Design             Ivan            Convert 
> > Toolkit config and
> > >init doc
> > >
> > >Looking at CVS, we have more documents than this, which is 
> good ;-).
> > >But, we do need to consolidate some, the documents that are being 
> > >merged can be removed from cvs. If there are remaining 
> > implementation
> > >details that would be lost, they should be put in an implementation
> > >notes document.
> > >
> > >Thanks, we're so close to finishing this cycle I can taste it :-)
> > >
> > >--Ivan
> > 
>