
	Weekly chat meeting #52: Thursday 8th November 2001
	
Participants: Peter Kretschmar, Niels Joergen Westergaard, Carol Anne Oxborrow
	Stefan Larsson and Sami Maisala
	
Subjects discussed: ADD 6.4 update
	Input parameter chatter/chatty
	HK parameter monitoring
	Updating parameter limits/monitoring using ISDC web pages
	Delivery of ISSW using new spectral data formats
	Installation and usefulness of OSM
	Science verification tests and input test cases
	Hardware status
	
Action Items:

AI011108_1 ALL	All ADD updates to be ready and in the CVS repository by
OPEN		9.00 Friday 16th November


**** Logging Started : Thu Nov 08 10:23:46 MET 2001
*** peter (~pkretsch@isdcul9.unige.ch) has joined channel #jemxadr
<peter> Good Morning! END
<njw> Hello Peter, good morning END
> Hello, hello Peter, how are you? Should we start taking bets on when/if the
> folks from the Frozen North will log on? 
> I admit we're quite early at the moment......but still, it'd give us
> something to do while we wait....END
> I've been looking at your updated diagrams for the ADD overview, they're
> very nice Peter. END
*** larsson (~larsson@tenma.dsri.dk) has joined channel #jemxadr
<larsson> Morning. END
> Also, while we're waiting.....Mark Gaber wrote to me and said to cut out
> the memory location log messages, so I guess I'll be using a lower chatter
> value in future.. END
> Hi Stefan, it's good to `see' you. END
<njw> Hello Stefan. 
<larsson> Hi NJ. 
> Let's wait one more minute, then we'll begin. END
<njw> Seeing the word 'chatter', can I ask where we are in the discussion ? END
> I delivered j_prp_verify1.0 with the parameter `chatter', but all my internal
> references are still with chatty. END
<njw> So we have more or less agreed to change the parameter name top chatter
* njw but leave the programs otherwise unchanged ? END
> No, we haven't really agreed........simply put: if ISDC uses that convention
<njw> Sorry top = to END
<peter> YEs, I think that is the agreement. END
> we'll have to change sooner ore later anyway. END
> I think it's easiest if we leave our internal references as they are, but
> satisfy ISDC's requirements for the parameters. END
> Does anyone think we should go the whole hog and changed for example
> J_CHATTY_VERY_VERBOSE to J_CHATTER_VERY_VERBOSE ? END
<peter> I see no reason for that - does anyone? END
<njw> Neither do I END
<larsson> No. END
> So we are agreed to change the parameter name to chatter but leave everything
> inside the source code unchanged. END
> Okay, let's assume Sami's not coming, and start with the ADD update:
> I would like the deadline for input to be next Friday, 16th November, so
> that I can release the 6.4 version sometime the following week, though
> latest Friday 23rd November. Is this a reasonable demand? END
<njw> That is OK for me END
<larsson> I cant complain. END
*** smaisala (~smaisala@gemini.astro.helsinki.fi) has joined channel #jemxadr
> I'll formalise that with an AI then END
<smaisala> Hi there! Sorry I'm late. END
<peter> Deaddline is fine with me. There should not be too much changes anyway. anymore. END
> Hi Sami! We've just made an AI to have all ADD updates done by Friday 16th
> say 9.00 am. Is that okay with you? END
<smaisala> Yes. END
> Could I please remind you all NOT to write completely new entries from
> scratch (unless of course the file doesn't already exist), but to download
> the current version and edit that. I do actually do some editing of your
> files to make them either a) tex-able or b) consistent with the rest of
> the document, and I would like these edits preserved in future editions.
*** Signoff: smaisala (the document, and I would like these edits preserved in future editions.)
*** smaisala (~smaisala@gemini.astro.helsinki.fi) has joined channel #jemxadr
*** Signoff: smaisala ([x]chat)
*** smaisala (~smaisala@gemini.astro.helsinki.fi) has joined channel #jemxadr
> Also we are supposed to be adding entries for each of the V3 tools, so
> some of you are going to have to learn to use the `cvs add' command because
> these files are not already in the repository. Please let me know the
> names of these new files so that I can include them in the basic tex
> file. END
> Any comments? END
<peter> Not from me, I think the system is clear enough. END
<njw> No, I'll remember this END
<smaisala> no. END
<larsson> No. 
> I'd prefer questions now, rather than at 8.57 next friday. END
> Any comments in general about the ADD updates? END
<njw> N
<larsson> No
<smaisala> N
> On to the AI list then.....
> AI19_11	CAO	Oct 2001 Talk with IT about what derived HK parameters shouldOPEN		be used for performance monitoring


> This one's going to need a new date, like mid November. Currently the
> various parameters and their limits are under heavy discussion between
> NL and various ESTEC bods (we've even got a teleconference about it tomorrow)
> and until these discussions are complete there are no definitive answers.
> I would like to know in the mean time, what the official procedure for
> making our NRT-monitoring wishes known to ISDC END
> Peter? How/who do I tell in ISDC what parameters should be monitored
<peter> Well, we have a document about JEM-X related activities, maintained by Nami
> by the operators, and how do we go about changing our wishes? END
<peter> and the list of parameters to be monitored is one appendix of this.  
<peter> Let me have a quick look.
<peter> Nami has foreseen formal channels (via Web pages) for:
<peter> - OSM Parameter Limit Modification Requests
<peter> - Shift Task Modification Requests
<peter> The former is to change the values of a few parameters, the latter can be used to have an Operator or Scientist on duty monitor certain parameters interactively on a regular basis.
<peter> Naturally all this requires ISDC approval, so we don't get completely swamped.
> It appears that a couple of these pages are actually on the ISDC homepage
<peter> The "activities" document mentioned above also conatins the list of regular tasks for the shift team.
<peter> Yes, they are available.
> now, so perhaps I'll give them a trial workout.
> Well that clears up the questions I had. END
> next AI:
> AI20.1	PK,SL	2/11/01 Redeliver all ISSW that needs to use the new spectral
OPEN		formats
CLOSED PK 31/10/01

<peter> Good. The one thing that may be missing is an efficient way to organize changes of many parameters at once
> Can we close your part of this one SL? END
<peter> END
<larsson> It is VERY close... END
<larsson> (To deliver that is). END
<peter> How close? END
<larsson> hours. END
<peter> Good! Good luck. END
<larsson> (Thanks for your hints by the way. END)
> Okay, the next lucky AI recipient is......
> AI20.12 SM,CAO	Send PK and RR emails detailing specific problems with 
OPEN		installation of OSM in Helsinki and Copenhagen


> I've `successfully' installed OSM, and had a flurry of emails with RR,
> so this is closed for me, how about you SM? END
> By `successfully' I means it's installed, but I've no idea if it works as
> it should. END
<smaisala> I have installed that too to my linux box. I had few problems. I will send full description what i have done later today. END
> How did the installation go for you SAMi? END
> I'll wipe out this AI then. END
<peter> Interactive OSM is of not too much use until you have a set of data which succesfully made it through our ScW pipeline.
<peter> It's made to analyze that. END
<smaisala> What is the location of that data? END
> But it could come in quite handy for the SV tests, because we'll be doing
> all that analysis here, won't we? END
<peter> See, for example, /isdc/testdata/data_flow_e2e_d/. There is a 64Mb .tar.gz file there.
<smaisala> OK. Thanks. END
<peter> Scientific Verification is done with _OSim_ produced data which is usually pretty useless for OSM purposes.
<peter> We simply do not have a system simulating everything. 
> Well, that's good to know END
<peter> Tests of V1 are done with simulated or real telemetry going all the way through the ScW and Rev pipelines.
<peter> V2 is tested with OSim data.
<peter> One problem with that is that OSim data is already corrected, so the correction step is never fully tested. END
> I've closed that AI, so let's move on to the last one for today:
> AI20.15 CAO,NJW	End Oct 2001 Get together with NL and make a list of test cases
OPEN		that will be needed for SV tests. Result: informal document
		to be circulated in IT and ISDC
		

<peter> IOSM might come i handy for the PLC data. END
> Let's hope so, Peter. END
> I've sent a preliminary email to NL and NJW, and heard nothing from them:
> how about it NJW? END
<njw> I'll look at it now END
> I'll send NL another email too. We'd better change that date to mid-Nov too.
> END
<peter> I know that time is scarce but we need this if the SV is supposed to go as planned. END
> I'll see what I can do by the end of the week. I had hoped that my original
> email would get the ball rolling a little more quickly than it has. 
>  It's not like my ideas are real astronomical ideas, because I'm not an
> astronomer.....they were more like metrologists ideas. So we really do
> need input from the astronomers on the project. END
> Any comments? END
<njw> N
<peter> Not from me. I have possibly ideas, but then this test should probably _not_ be done by me - I'm far too biased. END
> Okay, I'll make a note to get some movement on this one by tomorrow.
> Next.....AOB, always our favourite topic! Any 
> one for AOB? END
<larsson> No. END
<smaisala> no. END
<njw> N
<peter> No. END
> NO? But this is where we usually actually discuss something important!
> In that case, we must be doing okay (except for the usual time constraints!)
<peter> Any hardware news? END
<larsson> OK. I am heading for lunch. That is important is'nt it? END
> So have a good weekend everyone! END
> NJW: do you know anything about the hardware - I don't. END
<njw> No, FM2 seems to be in good shape. Being tested now in ESTEC END
<peter> Let's keep our fingers crossed! END
> Has it been turned on for 11 days yet? END
<njw> I don't think so END
> Then how do we know it's in good shape? END
<peter> Andit is firm that FM1 will be replace by the spare, right? END
> NL's latest email suggests that the spare will fly, not FM1. Of course we
> don't have a spare for FM2........END
<njw> There will be done some exercises to revive FM1 completely, but the chance
<njw> is very small END
<peter> OK, thanks. END
<peter> Talk to you next week. END
<smaisala> bye. END
*** Signoff: smaisala ([x]chat)
> Have a good weekend everyone! END
