#acumos-meeting: Architecture Committee

Meeting started by farheen_att at 14:03:36 UTC (full logs).

Meeting summary

  1. super admin requirements discussion (farheen_att, 14:09:21)
    1. Phillippe I tried to list functionality that admin and super admin would have. (farheen_att, 14:10:11)
    2. Rajesh - Never saw the slide. (farheen_att, 14:10:29)
    3. Phillippe - The admin will have three functions. Manage Add Remove users. They have to manage the request when a user wants to publish a model. (farheen_att, 14:11:01)
    4. they have to manage the catalog domain. (farheen_att, 14:11:18)
    5. Admin's control their domains. In the user profile you need to add a new field called domain. The list of domain will be managed by the super admin. The super admin will have the rite to create the domains (farheen_att, 14:12:32)
    6. Philippe - In big companies you have specific domains like R&D commercial. If you are the only admin you will not be able to manage the users of all the domains. (farheen_att, 14:13:59)
    7. there are two levels. super admin and admin. (farheen_att, 14:14:25)
    8. The admin will control the role of the publisher. (farheen_att, 14:26:13)
    9. ACTION: Philippe - create an end to end flow. (farheen_att, 14:27:33)
    10. Phiippe - Damain A the catalog feature will not be modified. Will be able to publish to public. (farheen_att, 14:29:06)
    11. Philippe - Give the publisher role to the admin of the domain. But if we can give the publisher role to the super admin. (farheen_att, 14:30:12)
    12. ACTION: Rajesh in parallel provide the wire-frame. We can target the UX review in the current sprint. (farheen_att, 14:32:01)
    13. Amol - there are a lot of screen changes that have to made. (farheen_att, 14:32:54)
    14. ACTION: Amol bring a list of all the impacted screens so we can analyze. (farheen_att, 14:33:35)

  2. License management admin feature (farheen_att, 14:35:35)
    1. Michelle - Introduce a formal License Admin role and possibly a license page to control the LUM editor and the RTU editor. (farheen_att, 14:36:31)
    2. Currently there is no control of who can use the RTU editor. There is a form field that needs to be controlled. Access and validation is needed. We are proposing adding the License Admin role in an Acumos instance to control the access, validation, and creating license profiles. (farheen_att, 14:39:29)
    3. I got concurrence from the PTL and Community Committee. (farheen_att, 14:42:14)
    4. Manoop - Starting with the License Admin role. We should be able to support creating the role and assigning to users. Beyond that you want to importing of files? (farheen_att, 14:44:38)
    5. Michelle - The RTU file is sent to LUM and retrieved from LUM. The License Admin can create license profile can be used to create default licenses for their users. (farheen_att, 14:46:15)
    6. Manoop will the LUM be coupled with Acumos? (farheen_att, 14:46:33)
    7. Michelle - we want to bundle it Acumos but keep it stand alone. (farheen_att, 14:46:50)
    8. Manoop - We can still map artifacts to keep the licensing modules separate. We can brain storm on that. (farheen_att, 14:47:46)
    9. Michelle - Our charge was two fold. Provide and out of box license management and also make it available to be extended with other platforms. (farheen_att, 14:48:57)
    10. Manoop - we can discuss that in future. For the license admin role can be designed with Farheen and Reuben. (farheen_att, 14:50:31)

  3. Epics SOAJS pipelines (farheen_att, 14:51:31)
  4. Composite Solutions (farheen_att, 14:51:45)
    1. Sayee Vaibhave the ask is to evaluate how SOAJS will impact your composite workflows. We don't have to develop if the work is too high. (farheen_att, 14:52:33)
    2. Viabhav - Deployment team has to be evaluated. (farheen_att, 14:53:13)
    3. We don't have a deployment team. Dont give the ETE deployment. How is it being deployed for Acu-Compose and MLWorkbench. (farheen_att, 14:53:59)
    4. Manoop - Can we re-use HELM charts that Acu-Compose will use? (farheen_att, 14:54:22)
    5. Vaibhav - We don't deploy HELM charts. We deploy blueprint orchestrator that takes care of if you have two models 3 images will be deployed. (farheen_att, 14:55:15)
    6. Manoop - Can we explore to see how we can translate that bp into what SOAJS can provide. (farheen_att, 14:55:49)
    7. Manoop - action/ Vaibhave create a user story as SOAJS scope and dependent on dev environment. Me and Murali will get you the environment. (farheen_att, 14:57:26)

  5. Training Deploying models (farheen_att, 14:57:46)
    1. Manoop - we want to see dependencies. (farheen_att, 14:58:02)
    2. Wenting - You are looking for dependencies we are not ready for that. We have decision several decision points. I can put together a deck and defer it to the next release. (farheen_att, 14:59:17)
    3. If SOAJS is ready you can use it or do you have another choice for Demeter? (farheen_att, 14:59:39)
    4. Wenting - we will use whatever the platform gives. (farheen_att, 15:00:08)
    5. Manoop - We will try SOAJS. (farheen_att, 15:00:38)
    6. Wenting agrees (farheen_att, 15:00:43)
    7. Manoop - Manoop when the SOAJS is released so Murali keep Wentings epic dependent on the SOAJS epic. (farheen_att, 15:01:31)
    8. Vaibhav - Looking at the user story I don't see SOAJS. (farheen_att, 15:01:54)
    9. Manoop - we redefined the scope using Jenkins. We were unsuccessful so we will update the epics with SOAJS. (farheen_att, 15:02:27)
    10. Manoop - There are stale repos in Acumos. Please reply to the list. (farheen_att, 15:03:07)
    11. Manoop - Mark them as read only so it will be cleaner. (farheen_att, 15:04:09)


Meeting ended at 15:04:13 UTC (full logs).

Action items

  1. Philippe - create an end to end flow.
  2. Rajesh in parallel provide the wire-frame. We can target the UX review in the current sprint.
  3. Amol bring a list of all the impacted screens so we can analyze.


People present (lines said)

  1. farheen_att (51)
  2. collabot` (3)


Generated by MeetBot 0.1.4.