- This paper in the Berlin document. It it a
set of action statements for the development of ACIS
started work on this paper in Novosibirsk, Russia on
Contrary to other working documents by Thomas Krichel,
this one has versions kept at in a directory. The
Directory holds different version of this same document
on files named after the modification date.
The slow progress on developing the ACIS software has
been a chronic problem. Ivan V. Kurmanov (henceforth Ivan)
and Thomas Krichel (henceforth Thomas) have simply to date
been unable to complete the project speedily.
Stage 1 of ACIS has been successfully completed and
the RAS web site is working well.
Ivan convinced Thomas to work on stage 3 prior to working
on stage 2. Thomas now thinks that this decision was
wrong because of the complication in stage three which
requires modifications to an external software Eprints
not under control of ACIS.
A major problem has been the decision of Thomas to
out-source the development of the eprints software
development. Thomas instructed Ivan to study eprints
and prepare an interoperability document that will
set out in detail changes that will have to be made.
Instead, Ivan wrote software that implements some
of the changes. Thomas has so far refused to pay
for that software.
In July 2005, Ivan and Thomas agreed to have a developer
Roman D. Shapiro (henceforth: Roman)
join the project. Roman comes with a
track record as a fast developer and even faster
learner, but lousy documenter.
Thomas hopes that with Roman developing and
Ivan monitoring and documenting, the development process
can be speeded up.
There is no alternative to speeding up the process because
OSI are likely to ask the money back if the project is
not finished soon. Thomas has signalled his willingness
to comply since he too rather would like to see the
money go rather than not deliver what he and Ivan
Nevertheless, Thomas and Ivan have decided to to
make a final push to get ACIS development done.
Special projects for ACIS implementation can be done
The official start of the ACIS Development Acceleration
Program, ADAP is 2005-07-13.
The team (Ivan, Roman, Thomas) wutilize a new
acis-development list. Members are supposed report each day on
what they have done or have not done for the project.
Failure to report (because off-line etc) are to be
reported in advance. Failure to report in advance can
be reported afterwards, but there need to be good reasons.
Failure to write leads to a loss of income of $10 a day.
The start is planned as follows. Ivan will write a
document detailing what he has done for eprints and
what further needs to be done. Thomas will pay Ivan
$500 when a first version is read. He notes that
this is more like an emergency money help, to keep
Ivan afloat rather than an acknowledgement that the
document cast $500 to write.
He will decide how much money to spend for the
contracted out effort.
On 2005-08-16, one month after the start of
the effort, the documentation is still not
finished. Thomas sets a date of 2005-08-30
date after which Ivan looses $100 for not
delivering within reasonable time.
Roman will get $500 from the special project
part of the budget to set up an installation
of ACIS with rclis AMF data. This installation
will be planned by Thomas. The installation
is supposed to work within 2 weeks. Roman is
supposed to start working on this starting 1 August.
On 2005-08-16, two weeks after starting, the
implementation is not ready and Roman looses
$50. He will now get $430 for the work, given
that he has also lost money for non-writing
on the list.
Ivan Kurmanov did not finish the documentation
within 4 weeks after the start. In fact by
2005-08-19 the documentation is not finished.
Ivan has been given two extra weeks, until
2005-08-30 to finish the documentation. However
in exchange Thomas has required and extra
piece to be added, a helper function that
will fetch a metadata recond from an OAI-PMH
compliant archive using the OAI-PMH "getrecord"
On 2005-08-19, Ivan and Thomas agree that
that the technical spec is not a single solid
document, but is a set of documents. Most of those become
part on ACIS documentation and must describe ACIS as if
stage 3 is completed (with optional easy-to-remove notes on
what is actually implemented already, and what is not yet).
The spec is based on Saskatoon. The first document
describes general document archive/ACIS interactions and
general tools for it (cooperate.html). The second document
describes EPrints-ACIS interactions, EPrints modifications,
add-ons, interface changes (eprints.html). The third
document describes related ACIS db structures and access to
Additionally, the set of documents includes a
current-development document with a structured list of
concrete steps that need to be taken to implement the above