# Running this project group

**Category:** [Reference Implementation: Java (archive)](https://discourse.openehr.org/c/reference-implementation-java-archive/154)
**Created:** 2006-03-17 12:14 UTC
**Views:** 1
**Replies:** 2
**URL:** https://discourse.openehr.org/t/running-this-project-group/14517

---

## Post #1 by @thomas.beale

Dear all,

here is what I would like to see happen:

- we elect a project leader - by default Rong. Doesn't matter if the leader can't take much time for coding, the point is to organise / synchronise work done by the team as a whole. Rong, if you don't accept, we will have to have a proper election! Responsibilities of the leader include doing / facilitating:
- helping to plan and synchronise work done by the team- deciding on when to do a branch- deciding on acceptance criteria for changes going back into the Trunk (Rong already wrote a QA doc on this)- deciding on when to do a tag- Rong makes sure that all the code changes so far (his, + bug fixes from elsewhere) are indeed in the repository
- then I suggest put a tag in the repository called "Release-0.95"
- then we can get to work...
Once we have this done, we can start working on the code knowing that we won't step on anyone's toes. Then we can get the work below done, as well as the Release 1.0 upgrade. My group at UCL are offering to do the upgrade on the RM and AM, which answers some of the needs below. I think (in the interests of efficiency) that Rong should probably either do the parser fixes, or else analyse the code enough that he can write a quite set of instructoins for someone else to do the changes and test them.

- thomas

---

## Post #2 by @system

Thomas Beale wrote:
>
> Dear all,
>
> here is what I would like to see happen:
>
>     \* we elect a project leader \- by default Rong\. Doesn't matter if
>       the leader can't take much time for coding, the point is to
>       organise / synchronise work done by the team as a whole\. Rong,
>       if you don't accept, we will have to have a proper election\!
>       Responsibilities of the leader include doing / facilitating:
>           o helping to plan and synchronise work done by the team
>           o deciding on when to do a branch
>           o deciding on acceptance criteria for changes going back
>             into the Trunk \(Rong already wrote a QA doc on this\)
>           o deciding on when to do a tag
>

No problem with all these\. Initially, I would need some instructions on
how to tag/branch etc on subversion, from Thomas I assume\.
>
>          o
>
>     \* Rong makes sure that all the code changes so far \(his, \+ bug
>       fixes from elsewhere\) are indeed in the repository
>

Yes, I will try to do this tomorrow\.
>
>    \*
>
>     \* then I suggest put a tag in the repository called "Release\-0\.95"
>

Sure\.
>
>    \*
>
>     \* then we can get to work\.\.\.
>
> Once we have this done, we can start working on the code knowing that
> we won't step on anyone's toes\. Then we can get the work below done,
> as well as the Release 1\.0 upgrade\. My group at UCL are offering to do
> the upgrade on the RM and AM, which answers some of the needs below\. I
> think \(in the interests of efficiency\) that Rong should probably
> either do the parser fixes, or else analyse the code enough that he
> can write a quite set of instructoins for someone else to do the
> changes and test them\.

Yep, I can do the parser fix\. Since the parser has dependency on the AM
code, I think it will be efficient if I could take the main
responsibility of the AM upgrade as well \(also I already started with
the ArchetypeDescription which I would like to finish soon\)\. I will try
to stick with the priority list when I fix the parser/AM\.

The ADL outputter is less coupled to the rest of AM, so it will be nice
if someone else \(from the editor team?\) could take the lead\.

We will also need to do some comparison between the RM code and the
specification, then lay out our resources accordingly\.

Do we have a list of Java developers that could lend a hand on this
operation \(with approx\. number of house per week that could be contributed\)?

cheers,
Rong

---

## Post #3 by @thomas.beale

Rong Chen wrote:
> Thomas Beale wrote:
>  
>
> No problem with all these\. Initially, I would need some instructions on
> how to tag/branch etc on subversion, from Thomas I assume\.
>  

I'll put some more instructions about this in the subversion user pages\.

\- t

---


**Canonical:** https://discourse.openehr.org/t/running-this-project-group/14517
**Original content:** https://discourse.openehr.org/t/running-this-project-group/14517