ChandlerWestwood: Progress in OpenSource Collaboration

1
Chandler/Westwood Progress in Open-Source
Collaboration

• Open Source Applications Foundation
• EDUCAUSE
• October 2004

2
Speakers

• Jack McCredie, U.C. Berkeley
• Oren Sreebny, U. Washington
• University user perspective
• Mitch Kapor, OSAF
• Chandler/Westwood update
• Lisa Dusseault
• Network and sharing architecture
• Calendaring standards - CalDAV

3
0.4 Our Big Bang Release recap

• Goal was to be experimentally usable for a few
  key end-user tasks.
• More on wiki page http//wiki.osafoundation.org/bi
  n/view/Chandler/ZeroPointFourPlanning
• Release date Oct 26, 2004

4
0.4 What We Planned

• Goal is to be experimentally usable for a few key
  end-user tasks
• Enter and edit items and collections
• Organize and label items and collections
• Share and communicate items and collections
• UI Landscape Sidebar, Tabs, Summary Detail
  views
• Initial functionality for Email, Calendar, Tasks
  Contacts
• Base security framework
• Elementary sharing e.g. share Calendar and
  Contacts

5
0.4 What We Will Deliver

• Experimentally usable
• Enter and edit items collections
• Organize and label items collections
• Share and communicate items collections
• UI landscape
• Sidebar, Tabs, Summary Detail views
• Initial functionality for
• Email, Calendar, Tasks, Contacts
• Elementary end-to-end collection sharing
• Calendar, Contacts, Item Collections
• Base security framework

6
0.4 Demo
7
Product Road Map
8
Major Milestones Ahead

• Next release 0.4 - first experimentally usable
  end-user release
• 0.5 Calendar Dog food release Be able to
  perform basic individual and collaborative
  calendaring tasks within a small workgroup
• The Kibble Release Target early adopters.
  OSAF uses Chandler on a day-to-day basis
• Kibble Release - Polish Kibble from real-world
  usage
• Westwood Release for Higher Education
• Deprecating Canoga as a release target - not
  targeting groups beyond early adopters

9
Client Product Roadmap
10
Things We Learned

• Underestimated cost of ambition
• Hard decisions about product strategy and focus
  could have been made earlier
• Proved harder to build engineering organization
• Cross-platform and rich clients are hard
• Build and integration work is non-trivial

11
Sharing Functional Requirements

• Synchronize Calendars
• View somebody elses calendar offline
• Add events to shared calendars
• Discuss availability
• Share/synchronize Contacts, tasks, email
• Sharing circle allowed read/write access
• Shares should be available gt90 of the time

Functional Requirements Drive Architecture
12
Network and Sharing Architecture, 0.4
Sharing
Email
Clients share by synchronizing torepository
IMAP, SMTP
HTTP/WebDAV
13
Sharing Data Model
Home directory
Shared Calendar
Sharing Server
Shared Todos
WebdavCollection
HTTPresource
14
Sharing via WebDAV

• Solves repository access requirements
• Browse, search, synchronize for offline use
• Multiple authors, permissions
• Clear data model for any application semantics
• Properties
• Collections and resources
• Provides additional benefits
• URLs
• Interoperability
• Known extensible protocol
• Proven, deployed, open technology
• Existing libraries, server implementations,
  scalable

15
WebDAV is application neutral
text
img
vCard
vCal
Data formats
WebDAV
Data access
SSL/TLS
Data privacy
TCP
Transport
Extend classic protocol layering
16
Future work

• Add support for Calendaring Standards
• CalDAV
• iCalendar (import/export)
• Invitations via iMIP (in iCalendar format)
• More messaging options
• POP3
• XMPP?

17
CalDAV

• Standard for HTTP calendar access
• Re-use GET, iCalendar format
• Standard for WebDAV calendar authoring
• Re-use PROPPATCH, PROPFIND
• Re-use WebDAV permissions (RFC3744)
• Support publishing as well as sharing
• Publishing concert dates, club events
• Support scheduling?
• Requirement for corporate calendaring

18
CalDAV Data Model
Calendar
VEVENTs
VTODOs
WebdavCollection
HTTP resource iCalendar file
19
CalDAV status

• CALSCH IETF Working Group Closed
• RFC2445 (iCalendar), RFC2446 (iTIP), RFC2447
  (iMIP) all completed in 1998
• CAP proposal six years work, now orphaned
• Effort to form new IETF Working Group
• Focus instead on revising iCalendar
• iCalendar simplification interoperability
• CalConnect consortium helps test and document
• CalDAV proposed to replace CAP
• Industry support and implementations started