European Middleware Initiative (EMI) An Overview Alberto Di Meglio v. 0.2 1.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Release & Deployment ITIL Version 3
Advertisements

EMI INFSO-RI European Middleware Initiative (EMI) Standardization and Interoperability Florida Estrella (CERN) Deputy Project Director.
Test Organization and Management
EGI: A European Distributed Computing Infrastructure Steven Newhouse Interim EGI.eu Director.
EGEE is a project funded by the European Union under contract IST JRA1 Testing Activity: Status and Plans Leanne Guy EGEE Middleware Testing.
EMI INFSO-RI European Middleware Initiative (EMI) Alberto Di Meglio (CERN) Project Director.
EGI-InSPIRE RI EGI-InSPIRE EGI-InSPIRE RI Future support of EGI services Tiziana Ferrari/EGI.eu Future support of EGI.
EMI SA2: Quality Assurance (EMI-SA2 Work Package) Alberto Aimar (CERN) WP Leader.
EMI INFSO-RI EMI SA2 Report Quality Assurance Alberto Aimar (CERN) SA2 WP Leader.
EMI INFSO-RI EMI Quality Assurance Processes (PS ) Alberto Aimar (CERN) CERN IT-GT-SL Section Leader EMI SA2 QA Activity Leader.
EGI: SA1 Operations John Gordon EGEE09 Barcelona September 2009.
EMI SA2: Quality Assurance (EMI-SA2 Work Package) Alberto Aimar (CERN) WP Leader.
EMI is partially funded by the European Commission under Grant Agreement RI Post EMI Plans and MeDIA Alberto DI MEGLIO, CERN Project Director WLCG.
EMI INFSO-RI SA2 - Quality Assurance Alberto Aimar (CERN) SA2 Leader EMI First EC Review 22 June 2011, Brussels.
EGI-InSPIRE RI EGI-InSPIRE EGI-InSPIRE RI SA2 services evolution (after the end of EGI-InSPIRE) Peter Solagna, Michel.
EGEE-III INFSO-RI Enabling Grids for E-sciencE EGEE and gLite are registered trademarks Steven Newhouse EGEE’s plans for transition.
Overview & Status of the Middleware & EGI Core Proposals Steven Newhouse Interim EGI Director EGEE Technical Director 26/05/2016 Status of EGI & Middleware.
European Middleware Initiative (EMI) – Release Process Doina Cristina Aiftimiei (INFN) EGI Technical Forum, Amsterdam 17. Sept.2010.
EMI INFSO-RI NA2 – Outreach and collaborations Status Report Emidio Giorgio (INFN Catania) Work Package Leader EMI First EC Review 22 June 2011,
EMI is partially funded by the European Commission under Grant Agreement RI SA2 – Quality Assurance Alberto AIMAR (CERN) SA2 Leader EMI Second EC.
Future of Operational Tools- Separate proposal First meeting – 6th October.
JRA Execution Plan 13 January JRA1 Execution Plan Frédéric Hemmer EGEE Middleware Manager EGEE is proposed as a project funded by the European.
INFSOM-RI SA2 Overview Valerio Venturi WP leader 2.
EGEE-III INFSO-RI Enabling Grids for E-sciencE EGEE and gLite are registered trademarks SA1: Grid Operations Maite Barroso (CERN)
EGEE MiddlewareLCG Internal review18 November EGEE Middleware Activities Overview Frédéric Hemmer EGEE Middleware Manager EGEE is proposed as.
EGEE-III-INFSO-RI Enabling Grids for E-sciencE EGEE and gLite are registered trademarks EGEE-III All Activity Meeting Brussels,
EMI INFSO-RI Project Overview NA1 – Administrative and Technical Coordination Alberto Di Meglio (CERN) Project Director 1 st EMI Periodic Review.
EMI INFSO-RI Guidelines and SQA Process Maria Alandes Pradillo (CERN) SA2.2 Task Leader.
EMI INFSO-RI SA1 – Maintenance and Support Francesco Giacomini (INFN) SA1 Leader 1 st EMI Periodic Review Brussels, 22 June 2011.
EGEE-III INFSO-RI Enabling Grids for E-sciencE EGEE and gLite are registered trademarks EGI Operations Tiziana Ferrari EGEE User.
EMI INFSO-RI EMI Roadmap to Standardization and DCI Collaborations Alberto Di Meglio (CERN) Project Director.
G.Govi CERN/IT-DB 1 September 26, 2003 POOL Integration, Testing and Release Procedure Integration  Packages structure  External dependencies  Configuration.
EMI INFSO-RI SA1 Session Report Francesco Giacomini (INFN) EMI Kick-off Meeting CERN, May 2010.
European Middleware Initiative (EMI) The Software Engineering Model Alberto Di Meglio (CERN) Interim Project Director.
INFSOM-RI Project Overview Alberto Di Meglio Project Manager 2.
EMI is partially funded by the European Commission under Grant Agreement RI Project Status and NA1 Alberto Di Meglio, CERN 3 rd EMI All-Hands Meeting.
EMI INFSO-RI European Middleware Initiative (EMI) Alberto Di Meglio (CERN)
State of Georgia Release Management Training
EMI INFSO-RI Software Quality Assurance in EMI Maria Alandes Pradillo (CERN) SA2.2 Task Leader.
EMI INFSO-RI EMI Quality Assurance Tools Lorenzo Dini (CERN) SA2.4 Task Leader.
EMI INFSO-RI Technical Overview Balázs Kónya (Lund University) Technical Director 1 st EMI Periodic Review Brussels, 22 June 2011.
EMI INFSO-RI European Middleware Initiative (EMI) Alberto Di Meglio (CERN) Project Director.
European Middleware Initiative (EMI) Alberto Di Meglio (CERN) Project Director.
INFSO-RI SA2 ETICS2 first Review Valerio Venturi INFN Bruxelles, 3 April 2009 Infrastructure Support.
EGEE-III INFSO-RI Enabling Grids for E-sciencE EGEE and gLite are registered trademarks Operations Automation Team Kickoff Meeting.
EMI INFSO-RI SA1 – Maintenance and Support Francesco Giacomini (INFN) EMI First EC Review Brussels, 22 June 2011.
Components Selection Validation Integration Deployment What it could mean inside EGI
EGEE-III INFSO-RI Enabling Grids for E-sciencE EGEE and gLite are registered trademarks Implementing product teams Oliver Keeble.
EMI INFSO-RI Project Overview NA1 Report Alberto Di Meglio (CERN) Project Director 1 st EMI Periodic Review Brussels, 22 June 2011.
EMI INFSO-RI European Middleware Initiative (EMI) Alberto Di Meglio (CERN) Project Director.
Collaboration ed. 11/11/2009gLite Open Collaboration1 The gLite Open Collaboration “WLCG Overview Board” M. Mazzucato gLite Collaboration Board Chair.
Ian Bird LCG Project Leader Status of EGEE  EGI transition WLCG LHCC Referees’ meeting 21 st September 2009.
EMI is partially funded by the European Commission under Grant Agreement RI Open Source Software and the ScienceSoft Initiative Alberto DI MEGLIO,
JRA1 Meeting – 09/02/ Software Configuration Management and Integration EGEE is proposed as a project funded by the European Union under contract.
EMI INFSO-RI SA2: Quality Assurance Status Report Alberto Aimar(SA2) SA2 Leader EMI First EC Review 22 June 2011, Brussels.
Co-ordination & Harmonisation of Advanced e-Infrastructures for Research and Education Data Sharing Grant.
EMI INFSO-RI Testbed for project continuous Integration Danilo Dongiovanni (INFN-CNAF) -SA2.6 Task Leader Jozef Cernak(UPJŠ, Kosice, Slovakia)
EMI INFSO-RI European Middleware Initiative (EMI) Alberto Di Meglio (CERN) Project Director.
EMI INFSO-RI EMI 1, open source middleware and the road to sustainability Alberto Di Meglio (CERN) Project Director EGI User Forum EMI Technical.
EMI INFSO-RI /04/2011What's new in EMI 1: Kebnekaise What’s new in EMI 1 Kathryn Cassidy (TCD)‏ EMI NA2.
JRA1 Middleware re-engineering
Bob Jones EGEE Technical Director
Sustainability of EMI Results
EMI and GISELA Collaboration
EGEE Middleware Activities Overview
European Middleware Initiative (EMI)
E-Infrastructure for Testing, Integration and Configuration of Software Alberto Di Meglio CERN, INFN, Engineering, 4D Soft, University of Wisconsin.
SA2: Quality Assurance Status Report
JRA1 (Middleware) Overview
European Middleware Initiative (EMI)
Presentation transcript:

European Middleware Initiative (EMI) An Overview Alberto Di Meglio v

Outline Presentation goals Project objectives Administrative structure Technical Structure Funding models Open Issues and next steps 2

Presentation Goals Summarize the current status of the proposal preparation Make sure everybody is aware of and agrees on the current decisions Outline some open issues Provide input for the following discussions Most of the information provided here has been already agreed upon, some of it may still be under discussion and needs clarifications 3

Project objectives Objective 1: Develop a harmonized middleware distribution able to meet and exceed the requirements of EGI and other distributed computing infrastructures, streamlining services and components from the different middleware consortia and other providers to be more consistent, coherent and standard- compliant Objective 2: Develop new essential middleware services/functionality as needed following the changing requirement of EGI and other infrastructures 4

Project objectives Objective 3: Reactively and proactively maintain the middleware distribution to provide users with increasingly user-friendly, maintainable, reliable, stable, and scalable software Objective 4: Promote the EMI objectives and outcomes in the user communities at large, defining and implementing standards when needed, moving the EMI middleware and its development and support procedures towards a sustainable model 5

Administrative Structure (1) Collaboration Board (CB) Executive CB (ECB) Project Director Project Executive Board Project Technical Group Technical Director 6

? Administrative Structure (2) Project Executive Board Project Technical Group PD NA1 NA2 JRA2 JRA1 SA1SA2 DM IS CM SEC TD 7 PT

Administrative Structure (3) 20 Institutes considered for partnership – ARC (6): KU, NIIF, LU, UiO, UPJS, UU – gLite (9): CERN, CESNET, CSIC/CESGA, INFN, NIKHEF, SFTC-RAL, SWITCH, UH.HIP, UoM – UNICORE (4): CINECA FZJ, ICM, TUD – DESY First prospective partners’ meeting in Munich on Sep 7 th Up to 2 additional partners may be considered for ‘non- development tasks’ (QA/Diss/Train/etc) in case no existing partner is suitable or willing 8

Administrative Structure (4) The following mailing lists have been set up: – – – – – – All relevant people have been subscribed, additional people can be invited as needed 9

Technical Structure (1) Definitions – Work Packages or Activities: the administrative entities within the project responsible to coordinate a set of tasks within a specific administrative or technical scope. Responsible for coordinating the contractual tasks across technical areas and producing project deliverables and milestones. The WP leaders have a coordination role – Technical Areas: the fixed areas where the different EMI middleware services and component fits. Each area has a coordinator responsible to work with the Technical Director to define the area objectives and outcome and with the WP Leaders to coordinate tasks execution across technical areas. The coordinator is responsible to defined the high level objectives of the individual product teams and ensure collaboration and communication among them 10

Technical Structure (2) Definitions – Product Teams: the services/components implementation teams within each area responsible to deliver software releases and all associated material. They perform the required technical tasks from design to release through implementation, testing and certification as part of one or more Work Package and according to what specified by the Project Technical Group. A Product Team has/may have a responsible person working with the Area Coordinator and the Work Package leaders to transform the project objectives into concrete software releases 11

Technical Structure (3) More on EMI Services – All software produced within EMI has to comply with the EMI project QA procedures and all internal and external acceptance criteria (user requirements) to become part of an EMI release – Software that does not comply is not included in EMI releases, although the provider can under their responsibility decide to release it independently. In this case they cannot use EMI ‘brand’ and funding to advertise and maintain those releases. – Product Teams are not fixed. The number and objectives of the PTs can change during the project lifetime depending on new development and changing requirements. Products that are obsoleted or replaced are supported until the agreed end-of-life deadlines and then dropped by EMI, but can still be supported by the providers with different funding 12

Technical Structure (4) General principles – EMI must maintain and evolve the middleware services for which it is responsible so that they meet or exceed the needs of EGI and other distributed infrastructures – The middleware services provided by EMI and needed by EGI and other DCIs have to be maintained as necessary. Maintenance includes bug fixing and all changes necessary to improve usability, reliability, stability and scalability of the services according to EGI and other DCIs requirements – Services must be evolved, harmonized, standardized, replaced, merged or discontinued as needed following a clear work plan. Not all services may need evolution or harmonization, but this doesn’t exclude them from EMI if they are used by EGI and other DCIs 13

Technical Structure (4) General principles – The ratio of effort dedicated to support and maintenance on one side and harmonization and new development on the other side is estimated at the beginning of the project to be around 35% of the resources for support and reactive maintenance (bug fixes) and around 45% for harmonization and new development (including proactive maintenance required to improve reliability, scalability, usability to satisfy the needs of the growing infrastructure usage). This ratio depends on the quality and usage of the services and may vary during the project lifetime in either direction. – The Certification process, repositories and tools are open to providers outside EMI in order to validate their software against the EMI services or specific adopted standards 14

Technical Structure (5) SA1: Support and Maintenance JRA2: Harmonisation and Integration JRA1: Service Development SA2: Quality Assurance Data Management Compute management Information Systems 15 Security

Technical Structure (6) SA1: Support and Maintenance JRA2: Harmonisation and Integration JRA1: Service Development SA2: Quality Assurance EMI Release 16

Technical Structure (7) SA1: Support and Maintenance JRA2: Harmonisation and Integration JRA1: Service Development SA2: Quality Assurance Building Unit testing Packaging Deployment testing Integration testing Regression testing Compliance testing Stress, scalability testing Acceptance criteria validation 17 Defines/monitors Product Team A Executes Development Harmonization/Integration Maintenance/Release

Basic Rules Every PT is responsible to execute its own testing All testing is done publicly and transparently, the tests and the test results are stored in the EMI test repository (ETICS). PTs using another PT products have a fixed grace period to validate new release candidates before they are released If the agreed tests/criteria are not passed, the release is rejected (can happen at various stages) 18

Basic Rules All packages have to comply with the agreed packaging formats (especially if components are to be included in mainstream OSs) Packages can be produced with EMI-provided tools (ETICS) or in other ways, but can be included in EMI releases only if they are compliant and pass the deployment tests SA2 defines the guidelines, checks compliance and assists in the implementation/execution 19

Release Policies Major releases: once or twice per year, may contain non-backward compatible changes Minor releases: a few times per year, fully backward compatible, may contain new functionality Revisions: every week or two weeks, only bug fixes Emergency: as needed, only specific bug fixes, use emergency release procedures 20

Relationships PTG EGI MCB, SA2 (MU), SA3, SA4 Requirements Specs Releases Repositories, tests, certification tools, etc SSCs ETICS Transition

Relationships SA2: Quality Assurance Data Management Compute management Information Systems 22 Security SA1: Support and Maintenance JRA2: Harmonisation and Integration JRA1: Service Development

Open Issues and Next Steps Relationships between PTG, Technical Area Leaders, Product Team Leaders and respective roles/responsibilities Categorization of services/components in terms of their expected lifecycle (support only, harmonization, evolution, expected end- of-life, etc) Project duration and effort distribution Relationships between EMI and external entities: – EGI – SSCs – ETICS – How to establish and enforce SLAs? 23