This section describes the plan to move the greenhouse concept forward.
Aim of this project: define a model to sustain the software developed by the GEANT association as a whole (including its members and/or associated peers worldwide).
Detailed project plan:
Project Management Phases
| PHASE | DESCRIPTION | COMMENT | ASSIGNED TO | START DATE | END DATE | STATUS |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Pre-project (preparation) |
| |||||
| Concept definition | Explore approaches to sustain software produced in the context of a collaboration where no model is already in place. | The idea of the Greenhouse has been discussed for a while. All the background work done is available on this wiki space: | NH | 10/2013 | 11/2014 | COMPLETE |
| 2. Initiation | Gather requirements and the options to implement the greenhouse | |||||
| 2.1 Needs assessment | Document list of requirements for different products.
| Output: Assess a select number of key products. Possible tools to asses: Open Conext, File Sender, Simple SAMLphp, MediaMosa, (TCS software?) Update 210115: SimpleSAMLphp and Filesender have completed the product needs assessment and Surfnet have promised to complete. Initial sounding call with Apereo undertaken. See also: | NH | 12 Feb 2015 | 20 Feb 2015 | COMPLETE |
| 2.2 Gathering info on models to implement the greenhouse | Short list of possible approaches that match the core requirements identified in 2.1. | Output: a matrix on the wiki with possible approaches. Possible existing organisations to interview are: NLLab, OSS Watch, Apereo. This task can start in parallel with 2.1 as some of the aspects are known. See also: Software Sustainability Within the TERENA Community Differentiating the TERENA Greenhouse Update 090415: Uploaded preliminary (draft) document (Greenhouse Possible Approches v0.1.docx) based on the product needs assessment completed so far. | AS | 20 Feb 2015 | 27 Feb 2015 | COMPLETE |
| 2.3 Presenting the most suitable options | Prepare a document to present a short list of options and their risks/benefits. | Output: short document with recommendations on the approach to implement | LF | 23 Feb 2015
| Planned for 15 May 2015 First version Delivered 26 May 2015 There was a presnetation at the TAC where support was received from NORDUNET, AARNET and I2. | COMPLETE |
| 3. Selection | ||||||
| Select most suitable model | Select the approach to implement | The preliminary work carried out in the previous step resulted in recommending to partner with an exiting company which would effectively operate the greenhouse framework. A presentation was given at the TAC meeting during TNC.
| Management | 17 Aug 2015 | PID sent to the Amsterdam MT. The PID was presented to the PMO on 25th of Aug. | COMPLETE |
| 4. Execution |
|
| ||||
| Phase 1 - Mid Sep- End Nov |
| Output: workshop report with communty feedback
| LF | 30 Sep 2015 | 30 Sep 2015 | COMPLETE |
| 2. Incude feedback from the workshop and start the testing phase fo the Greenhouse with the FileSender team | External work - LF to gather the feedback. The final deadline to conclude the work was moved to Jan as per FileSender request. | 1 Oct 2015 TBC after the workshop |
30 jan 2016 | COMPLETE | ||
| 3. Define the conditions for a MoU with the third party organisation running the greenhouse | Output draft MoU to be discussed with the SIG | NH | 1 Nov 2015 This work item will effectively start in Jan |
30 Jan 2016 | NOT STARTED | |
| 4. Provide evaluation report from Fliesender experience and proposal for permanent greenhouse structure. | Output: report | File Sender team | 1 Nov 2015 Deadline moved as File Sender test is not finished yet. |
30 Jan 2016 | NOT STARTED | |
| 5. Closing Phase 1 | Output: MoU witht NLNet | |||||