Thanks, Johannes! For those who could not attend, I think it's useful to know that the prioritization was made by counting appearances of requirements in 8 use case mappings; those that collected more than 4 counts got labelled green. Counting was done in a break before the last session, so I personally had no opportunity to digest the result during the meeting. Maybe others were luckier :-) I can't see why 50% is the in/out margin: it can be 66% or 75%, really. Or 33%. Depends what do we want to achieve: meet all reasonable requirements, or focus on those which are truly common. No requirement scored 8, by the way, so 5+ is not exactly 50%, actually. I must also admit I'm still confused whether the requirements are made *by* middleware providers, or *for* middleware providers. My impression was that it is the latter - or at least most people tried to present use cases, not middlewares. Meanwhile the spreadsheet rather suggests the former, having providers' names in column titles. The difference is obvious: e.g., when a use case needs, for example, bulk operations, it will need this feature to be implemented in *every* middleware, naively - because then the scientists will be able to run their tools across *all* middlewares, and our interoperability dream will be achieved. However, from the spreadsheet one may (mistakingly?) conclude that it is needed only in some middlewares, and thus didn't manage to get enough points. So, is our interoperability only a luxury for some users who are lucky to have applications that can be squeezed into our standards ? And another note from the Brussels meeting: already before Munich we discussed a possibility of grouping requirements from narrowly scoped, like "I need a resume after hold", to more generic ones. This was done in a way too generic manner on Tuesday, when e.g. one big common requirement was "Glue2". Did anyone take a snapshot of that table drawn by Morris? I have to repeat: I simply had no time to digest the "green" requirements to assess what are the high-level commonalities between them, if any. Well, Glue2 was there, yes, but I didn't have to write 3 use cases and map them to 173 requirements to get *this* wisdom as the bottom line ;-) I wish we had more time to discuss these things on Tuesday. Cheers, Oxana 26.10.2010 18:52, Johannes Watzl пишет:
Dear all,
we are just finished with the PGI sessions here at OGF30. The requirements list including a prioritization based on the use cases can be found on GridForge: http://forge.gridforum.org/sf/go/doc16080?nav=1
If you have any objections, please send a message to the list before the next PGI call on Thursday, 4 November 2010.
Best, Johannes