Here are essentially the transparencies I presented and we went over. There was some discussion about the charge, that we are to supply not evaluations of supportability or maintainability of the current candidate software, but a prescription (or strategy) for such an evaluation. We plan to look at candidate products in parallel with specifying these requirements to make them "real" and to uncover any requirements we otherwise might have missed. I have been able to juggle rooms at fcc so we have fcc2b 1-3 on Tuesdays. Because of conflicts with other meetings, I propose we meet at 2-3 unless we think we need a longer session, for which we can start at 1 and some will have to miss. I will get an agenda out for next Tuesday before the weekend is out. Gene Present: Robert K., David D., Qizhong L., Scott S., Frank N., Jeff K., Chih-hao H., Gene O. PASSUMA - Run II Physics Analysis Software Support and Maintenance Requirements Group Joint CDF/D0/CD Working Group Agenda for today ---------------- * Go over charge and context * Agree on approach - go over what the functional group is doing * Assign names to look at candidate software * Make a start at SU/MA requirements list * Schedule future meetings and presentations Meetings, meetings... * Only have a month for DRAFT- Weekly up to 2 hour meetings? * Tuesday and Wednesday seem to be out Members ------- * CDF: Robert Kennedy, David Dagenhart * D0: Scott Snyder, Qizhong Li * CD: Dennis Box, Joy Kyriakopulos, Gene Oleynik, Frank Nagy, Jeff Kalenback, David Fagan, Chih-hao Huang Charge ------ PAS: (From the WBS) * Project Definition: This project will provide a coordinated set of tools and an environment in which to do physics analysis tasks. The tools may be some combination of commercial, public domain and HEP or FNAL developed products,but in any case they will be distributed, supported and maintained. Tools will be investigated and evaluated in time to be used by CDF and D0 for Run-II Physics Analysis. * Group A are looking at functional requirements, we are looking and support and maintenance requirements. * We are to define a list of "requirements": technical questions to ask of candidate tools to determine what kind of support and maintenance impact choosing the tool will have. * To bring maintenance and support costs up-front * Current thought is members from A and B + others will come together on A and B completion to make recommendations using the A and B requirements * We have 4 weeks to produce a draft report, 6 weeks for a final report * April 7th draft, April 21 Final? PASFRG dates are draft April 1, final April 15 Functional Group ---------------- Started with a set of requirement categories Have "conveners" for Candidate products: * PAW limitations: John Marrifino * ROOT: Pasha Murat * LHC++: John Marriffino and Irwin Gaines * Nirvana: Paul LeBrun * PC tools: Pushpa Bhat * Commercial Tools: Dane Skow * Shareware Tools: Eileen Berman Approach? --------- * Along same lines as PASFRG? * Can we assign 1 from experiment, 1 from CD to each tool (perhaps skipping PAW)? * What do we look for - should simultaneously start up a list * Presentations at meetings: * ROOT: Robert K., (Scott S., Chi-hao H. cint) Qizhong L. (March 24th meeting) * LHC++: David D. Dennis B. (March 31st) * Nirvana: Joy K., (TBD) * PC tools: (assume under others) * Commercial Tools: Gene O., Frank N. (TBD) * Shareware Tools: Jeff K., Scott S. (March 24th or 31st) * PAW: Gene O. along with John M. (March 17th) Starting draft (+meeting additions) ----------------------------------- Support ------- * Who provides consulting support? Commercial, other Lab, CERN. Pool of knowledge and fallbacks? * Is training required (for support staff)? * How much (local) support will be required (is it complicated and hard to use)? For commercial or freeware, what kind of support is provided? * Is the software completely and well documented (user level)? * Licensing of software - what kind and $$ * Is user training needed and available? What is the cost? Maintenance ----------- Who and how much: * Who provides maintenance both local and external to the Lab? What are the fallbacks (run over by bus, company folds)? * What is the cost to train someone to maintain the software? What is maintenance/licensing costs (commercial). * How much software is there (word count). How much needs to be supported locally (how many people required)? Portability. * Availability on Run II operating systems. 64 bit considerations? Define Run II OS (Linux, NT, other Unix?). * Endianship and other heterogeneous environment considerations? * Are there any part of the software that are fragile against compiler and operating systems releases, different OS, compilers? * Is the software product build dependent on a specific compiler or is it compiler independent? Standards: * What kind of build environment is provided. Is it robust? * Are standards followed. Compiler standards? Library standards (e.g. STL, POSIX). Are they fully supported (e.g. cint and STL)? * Are good coding practices (documentation) followed? Is there good developer's documentation (can the product be "taken over"?) Other: * Is source code available (perhaps in escrow)? * Are there external software components that are out of our control? * Will the tool/software need to be upgraded to satisfy Run II functional requirements, and how difficult will this be? * Will the an interface/adapter need to be made to fit the tool in with the rest of the analysis tool framework (e.g. data import/export).