Meeting on May 16, 2011

Agenda

1. Attendance
2. Announce agenda
3. Approve May 2, 2011 Meeting Notes. Ask for review and address any problems seen in the notes.
4. Summer of Code updates
5. Vote on new core developers
6. Discuss CMake conversion
7. Discuss possible SDK changes
8. Open Questions
9. Summary and closing

Notes

Attendance

• tclarke
• kstreith
• dsulgrov
• rforehan
• jcouvuts
• dadkins
• yiwei
• mconsidi (partial, sufficient for vote)

Summary

Summer of code project are beginning and details on student schedules, etc. are available on their project overview wiki pages. Weekly updates will happen on those pages.

tclarke nominated jcouvuts for a position as a core developer and the nomination was seconded by mconsidi and rforehan. A vote was held. jcouvuts is now a core developer.

Links to the read-ahead material on cmake and SDK changes were made available and a discussion was had. At least two of the core developers do not regularly use the SDK and don't have much of an opinion on its layout. tclarke stated a number of opinions regarding the layout which are detailed in the logs. kstreith is in favor of creating debug mode msi installers for Windows as a way if distributing debug binaries. This conversions will be continued on the developer's mailing list.

Decisions

A vote to elect jcouvuts to a position of core developer passed (6 yea, 0 nea, 0 abstain)

The next meeting would normally be Monday, May 30 which is a US holiday. A poll was conducted regarding a rescheduling of the meeting. The meeting has been rescheduled to Tuesday, May 31 at the normal time (2:00pm EDT).

Logs

2011-05-16T13:59:16 <tclarke> ok, let's start the meeting with attendance
2011-05-16T13:59:16 <tclarke> here
2011-05-16T13:59:17 *** jcouvuts has joined #opticks
2011-05-16T13:59:21 <kstreith> here
2011-05-16T13:59:22 <dsulgrov> here
2011-05-16T13:59:25 <rforehan> Here
2011-05-16T13:59:35 <jcouvuts> here
2011-05-16T13:59:56 *** dadkins has joined #opticks
2011-05-16T14:00:11 <dadkins> here
2011-05-16T14:00:14 <Yiwei> here
2011-05-16T14:00:20 <tclarke> Attendance
2011-05-16T14:00:20 <tclarke> Announce agenda
2011-05-16T14:00:20 <tclarke> Approve May 2, 2011 Meeting Notes. Ask for review and address any problems seen in the notes.
2011-05-16T14:00:21 <tclarke> Summer of Code updates
2011-05-16T14:00:21 <tclarke> Vote on new core developers
2011-05-16T14:00:21 <tclarke> Discuss CMake conversion
2011-05-16T14:00:21 <tclarke> Discuss possible SDK changes
2011-05-16T14:00:22 <tclarke> Open Questions
2011-05-16T14:00:22 <tclarke> Summary and closing
2011-05-16T14:00:32 <tclarke> last meeting's minutes are here http://opticks.org/confluence/display/opticksChat/May+2%2C+2011+Meeting+Notes
2011-05-16T14:00:44 <tclarke> if there are problems, please let me know otherwise I'll consider them approved
2011-05-16T14:00:55 <tclarke> let's start with a brief summer of code update
2011-05-16T14:01:20 <tclarke> we're about that start so students are getting their schedules on the wiki and introducing themselves
2011-05-16T14:01:40 <tclarke> each week they will have a report available so you can follow their work
2011-05-16T14:01:57 <tclarke> there's not much new so we'll move on if there's nothing else to talk about here
2011-05-16T14:02:21 <tclarke> ok, next order of business
2011-05-16T14:02:25 <mconsidi> here
2011-05-16T14:02:48 <tclarke> I'd like to propose jcouvuts as a new core developer with commit privs, etc.
2011-05-16T14:03:05 <tclarke> anyone want to second the nomination?
2011-05-16T14:03:10 <tclarke> or propose another?
2011-05-16T14:03:11 <mconsidi> Second
2011-05-16T14:03:11 <rforehan> Second
2011-05-16T14:03:46 <tclarke> he's been working on core issues for a while and I feel he's familiar with our procedures, etc.
2011-05-16T14:03:57 <tclarke> he's worked on an offshoot project so he's familiar with the code base
2011-05-16T14:04:12 <tclarke> so let's vote...this vote is for existing core developers
2011-05-16T14:04:23 <tclarke> if you approve, type +1, -1 for disapproval and 0 to abstain
2011-05-16T14:04:28 <rforehan> +1
2011-05-16T14:04:32 <mconsidi> +1
2011-05-16T14:04:33 <dsulgrov> +1
2011-05-16T14:04:34 <tclarke> +1
2011-05-16T14:04:38 <dadkins> +1
2011-05-16T14:04:44 <kstreith> +1
2011-05-16T14:05:02 <tclarke> ok, that's 6 approve, 0 disapprove, and 0 abstain with a quorum of 6
2011-05-16T14:05:05 <tclarke> the issue passes
2011-05-16T14:05:14 <tclarke> welcome jcouvuts
2011-05-16T14:05:14 <jcouvuts> thanks
2011-05-16T14:05:26 <tclarke> we'll get your accounts and privs setup today
2011-05-16T14:05:35 <tclarke> anything else on this issue?
2011-05-16T14:05:38 <kstreith> i'll send you an e-mail offline with details
2011-05-16T14:05:45 <jcouvuts> thankyou
2011-05-16T14:06:04 <tclarke> next issue, cmake conversion and possible SDK changes...since these are related, let's discuss them as a single topic
2011-05-16T14:06:30 <tclarke> kstreith sent out a couple of emails with details so we'll skip the background...kstreith, could you briefly summarize?
2011-05-16T14:06:58 <tclarke> here are the details
2011-05-16T14:06:59 <tclarke> cmake: http://opticks-devs.2021163.n4.nabble.com/Switching-to-CMake-td3515161.html
2011-05-16T14:07:06 <tclarke> sdk changes: http://opticks-devs.2021163.n4.nabble.com/Changing-the-SDK-td3518334.html
2011-05-16T14:07:43 <kstreith> CMake summary - replace existing SCons and Visual Studio build system with CMake
2011-05-16T14:07:54 <kstreith> for Opticks, Python, Spectral and IDL
2011-05-16T14:09:04 <kstreith> SDK changes summary - make SDK compatible with new 3rd party dependency system (e.g. Ivy) and possibly other changes that the community feels would benefit the SDK
2011-05-16T14:09:11 <kstreith> pretty wide open on the SDK changes
2011-05-16T14:09:16 <tclarke> as I pointed out in my reply, I think switching to cmake is a good idea...perhaps we can change one of the Extras projects first to see how it works? (this might include writing some common CMake rules which would go into the core once opticks is converted)
2011-05-16T14:10:04 <kstreith> the one concern with converting an extension first is that we need to write CMake find modules for 3rd party libraries
2011-05-16T14:10:13 <tclarke> as for the SDK, I'm in favor of reordering to match out 3rd party dependencies layout for the sdk and shipping the SDK as an ivy dependency
2011-05-16T14:10:33 <kstreith> similiar to the current SCons tools and it might be better for these to live with core Opticks instead of an extension
2011-05-16T14:10:50 <tclarke> people building extensions would then just need ivy/any and our ivy rules (distributed either as a tarball or checked out of subversion directory) to get everything they need to build
2011-05-16T14:11:28 <tclarke> this includes the renaming of the libs to include Opticks and (for windows) a d.lib and .lib scheme for debug/release
2011-05-16T14:12:15 <tclarke> I think we should combine the core libs into a single lib however....this includes utilities, desktop, gui, model, etc.....everything except PlugInLib, PlugInUtilities, SimpleApiLib, HdfPlugInLib, and NitfPlugInLib
2011-05-16T14:13:05 <kstreith> i should point out that the core libs are in most cases recursively dependent on each other, which the visual studio linker doesn't mind being a multi-pass linker
2011-05-16T14:13:32 <tclarke> also, the ivy SDK distro should include the binaries and support files (everything needed to run opticks when building an extension) so there wouldn't be a requirement to install a release version to use the debug builds
2011-05-16T14:13:45 <kstreith> but almost all current unix/linux linkers are single pass linkers by default. Currently, we have to contort SCons and if we don't move to a single lib would have to do the same for CMake
2011-05-16T14:14:09 <tclarke> finally, I'm ok not distributing the tutorial source code in ivy...if someone wants it, they can checkout from the appropriate subversion release tag
2011-05-16T14:14:38 <tclarke> I think those are the major points I have an opinion on re: the sdk and build system
2011-05-16T14:14:39 <tclarke> .
2011-05-16T14:16:32 <kstreith> anyone else want the floor?
2011-05-16T14:16:51 <tclarke> if not, we'll open the floor for other business
2011-05-16T14:17:12 <tclarke> kstreith: I assume you didn't want to vote on the issue today, just start a discussion?
2011-05-16T14:17:21 <kstreith> correct
2011-05-16T14:17:30 <tclarke> ok, if there are no other issues, we'll end the meeting
2011-05-16T14:17:36 <kstreith> hold on, now
2011-05-16T14:17:44 <tclarke> ok...I'll hold until you are done
2011-05-16T14:17:45 <tclarke> .
2011-05-16T14:18:53 <kstreith> i disagree with including everything needed to run Opticks via Ivy
2011-05-16T14:19:39 <kstreith> i am more in favor of building an equivalent to the existing MSI installers on Windows, but comprised of the debug binaries and a different default directory, for instance C:\Program Files\OpticksDebug[version]
2011-05-16T14:20:05 <kstreith> .
2011-05-16T14:21:41 <kstreith> do any of the core developers have strong opionions on the SDK? I understand that most of the core developers only work on the extras extensions and so care more about continuity of those build procedures
2011-05-16T14:21:47 <kstreith> that'
2011-05-16T14:21:54 <tclarke> I think the msi introduces installation and management overhead for developers...I see the installer as a convenience for the end user and deployment admin
2011-05-16T14:22:20 <kstreith> that's fine if core developers don't have strong opinions on the SDK, i would expect other plug-in developers to have the strongest opinions
2011-05-16T14:22:50 <tclarke> I voiced mine primarily because I develop for the core/extras and other extensions so I have some crossover experience
2011-05-16T14:22:52 <tclarke> .
2011-05-16T14:23:18 <tclarke> if there are no other points to make, let's table this and I'll summarize in the meeting minutes, we can continue the discussion on list if necessary
2011-05-16T14:23:38 <tclarke> I'll wait a minute or two in case there's anything else to discuss, either on this topic or an open topic
2011-05-16T14:23:42 <mconsidi> I'm ok with proceeding
2011-05-16T14:23:57 <rforehan> I work on spectral and don't use the SDK
2011-05-16T14:24:17 <mconsidi> I don't use the sdk either
2011-05-16T14:26:07 <kstreith> well, i wanted to start the discussion and i think we've done that
2011-05-16T14:26:15 <tclarke> ok, let's end the meeting then
2011-05-16T14:26:43 <tclarke> one last issue
2011-05-16T14:27:02 <tclarke> since the next meeting is a holiday in the US, most core devs won' t be here
2011-05-16T14:27:06 <tclarke> should we reschedule
2011-05-16T14:27:07 <tclarke> ?
2011-05-16T14:27:20 <kstreith> yes
2011-05-16T14:27:21 <mconsidi> Yes
2011-05-16T14:27:32 <tclarke> how about we move it to tues the 31 at the same time?
2011-05-16T14:27:44 <rforehan> Ok
2011-05-16T14:27:45 <mconsidi> Ok with me
2011-05-16T14:27:58 <tclarke> alright, the next meeting will be in 2 weeks and 1 day
2011-05-16T14:28:14 <kstreith> i will be out that day, but that shouldn't cause the meeting to move
2011-05-16T14:28:19 <tclarke> thanks for attending, see the mailing list for the notes
2011-05-16T14:28:45 <tclarke> we could move to wed the 1st if that's better
2011-05-16T14:29:06 <dadkins> I have meetings both days, so count me out.
2011-05-16T14:29:30 <tclarke> ok, let's say tue then...
2011-05-16T14:29:35 <tclarke> meeting adjourned