Page History

Attendees:  Larry, Sherri, Rob, Tracy, Jacob, Sarah, Scott, Cory, Craig, Kwan, Yeon, Sherri, Tin, Sana, Shireseha, Jason

Discussion Points:

Nexus Server Configuration

• Testing on DEV tier - config of security permissions
• Manual publishing until configured
• CTS2 - Maven build was the simplest case, so that's the focus.
• ANT publishing not currently available.  Will need to look at public and private key possibilities.  Sara's team should be able to support. (LexEVS requires ANT build).

Tech Stack Updates

• DB
  • Currently at 5.5 
  • Tech stack is moving to 5.6 and migration has started. 
  • Preliminary tests show that we can support 5.6.
  • 5.6.33 is the current version.  Yeon can update each tier for EVS team.
  • No plan for 5.7, but MarieDB (in 6 months to year)
  • Need to move to 5.6 as soon as we can.
• CentOS 7
  • LexEVS is ready to upgrade to CentOS 7
  • CentOS 7 is available.
  • Blade servers would need to be ordered or current blades would need to be re-imaged.
  • May be able to shuffle the upgrade and swap servers so it moves up.  
• Java 1.8
  • LexEVS is ready with 1.8
  • Waiting on other tooling to support 1.8

Dev Environment

• Set up secondary Dev instance for Jenkins and application servers.  
• Need to consider what database connection is needed. 
• Suggested - set up a VM for this Dev 
• Can submit tickets to Jacob to get this started.  

Docker and CI Discussion

• Overview of Mayo usage and configuration.
  • NCI uses Jenkins 2.19
  • Docker differences between what NCI has and Mac version.
  • Would require move from Ubuntu.  
  • Image repository not ready, testing Nexus 3.x for Docker Image Storage.  
• NCI can support Docker configuration. 
• Need to negotiate timelines.  

Decision Points:

• Plan to migrate to 5.6.33 as soon as possible.
• Plan to migrate to CentOS7 (work with Jacob).
• Plan configuration of DEV instance (work with Jacob).
• Plan to further investigate Docker configuration.  (with Kwan)
  
  

Attendees: Tin, Jason, Rob, Tracy, Scott, Craig, Cory, Larry, Sherri

Discussion Points:

• Harold noted that the OMG process stalled by no further participation by Mayo.
• Remaining issues:
  • SOAP WSDL
  • Miscellaneous issues
• Additional Features:
  
  • Columnar Format
  • Cannonical RDF
  • SNOMED CT implementation guide 
• FHIR and CTS2 are similar in that both are complex but much is not required - only use what you need.
• Clinical Research and Biomedical informatics groups are taking note of FHIR and beginning participation in FHIR.
• FHIR Terminology - possible integration of CTS2 services. 
• Grahm Grieve (HL7 FHIR) is in support of CTS2 services for FHIR.  
• Current Planning
  • Plan on implementing entity description in native FHIR to demonstrate the differences and begin discussing with the FHIR community.
  • Review FHIR terminology and CTS2 terminology to describe overlap and gaps.  A paper will be written and published.  
• Other project - CIMI HSP - Determined that CTS2 wasn't a candidate for services.
• FHIR does offer:
  • Provides extensibility
  • Not to be fully implemented.
• HL7 and OMG HSSP process was not successful in that the standard wasn't successfully integrated back to HL7.
• A better model would have been what FHIR is doing within HL7 - collaborative within HL7.  
• Harold to be at the January HL7 meeting to listen in on the FHIR sessions.  

Decision Points:

Attendees:

Discussion Points:

Decision Points:

Attendees:

Discussion Points:

Decision Points:

Friday, December 2nd, 2016