Inter-Organizational Workflow

Also known as: Inter-organizational Workflow, MU Community Workflow, or PKC DevOps Cycle. Due to the inter-organization nature of the workflow, some form of Federated Identity Management, or authentication and authorization protocols, such as [OAuth]] is necessary to get it to work online.

Introduction

The purpose of PKC Workflow, or the PKC DevOps Cycle, is about leveraging well-known data processing tools to manage source code, binary files in a unifying abstraction framework. A framework that treats data in three types of universal abstractions.

1. File from the Past: All data collected in the past can be bundled in Files.
2. Page of the Present: All data to be interactively presented to human agents are shown as Pages.
3. Service of the Future: All data to be obtained by other data manipulation processes are known as Services.

By managing the classifying data assets in terms of files, pages, and services using version control systems, we can incrementally sift through data in three namespaces that intuitively labels the nature of data according to time progression, which reflects the partially ordered nature of PKC Workflow. This approach to iteratively cleanse data is also known as DevOps cycles.

Given the above-mentioned assumptions, data assets can be organized according to these three types in the following way:

1. Files can be managed using Content-addressing networks, their content will not be changeable, since they can be stored in IPFS format.
2. Pages are composed of data content, style templates, and UI/UX code. This requires certain test and verification procedure to endure their healthy operations. The final delivery of data content presentation often needs to be dynamically adjusted to users' device and the operating context of the device. Therefore, pages are considered to be deployed data assets.
3. Services are programs that have well-known names and should be provisioned on computing devices with service quality assessment. They are usually associated with Docker-like container technologies and have published names registered in places like Docker hub. As service provisioning technologies mature, tools such as Kubernetes will be managing services with service quality real-time updates, so that the behavior of data services can be tracked and diagnosed with industry-strength protocols.

PKC Workflow in a time-based naming convention

Given the complexity of possible data deployment scenarios, we will show that all these complexity can be compressed down to a unifying process abstraction, all approximated using PKC as a container for various recipes to cope with different use cases by treating all phenomenon in terms of time-stamped data content. Then, PKC provides an extensible dictionary to continuously define the growing vocabulary, at the same time, provides computable representations to solutions, given that these computing results are deployed using computing services that knows how many users and how much data processing capacity that it can mobilize to accomplish its demand. In other words, under this three-layered (File, Page, Service) classification system, PKC workflow provides a fixed grounding metaphor, (Past, Present, Future) to deal with all data.

PKC Devops Strategy

There will be three public domains to test the workflow: [1] for developmental tests [2] for candidate service deployment [3] for live data backup data demonstration

Task 1
Upgrade current container to Mediawiki 1.35 to latest stable version [1.37.1], Ref, check for compatibility with related extension, and create pre-built container image to local machine

• Matomo Spatial Feature to update
• Install Youtube extension

Task 2
Implement the container into pkc-mirror.de, ensure to work with ansible script and download the pre-built image into cloud machine. Ensure it is working with Matomo, and Keycloak.

Task 3
Import content from pkc.pub, and try to convert EmbeddVideo into Youtube Extension, or find newer extension to support Video Embedding.

Task 4
Connecting PKC Local Installation to use confederated account to pkc-mirror.de Keycloak instances, and test for functionality.

Please see the details of the process in this page.

Notes

• When writing a logic model, one should be aware of the difference between concept and instance.
• A logic model is composed of lots of submodels. When not intending to specify the abstract part of them, one could only use Function Model.
• What is the relationship between the model submodules, and the relationships among all the subfunctions?
• Note: Sometimes, the input and process are ambiguous. For example, the Service namespace is required to achieve the goal. It might be an input or the product along the process. In general, both the input and process contain uncertainty and need a decision.
• The parameter of Logic Model is minimized to its name, which is the most important part of it. The name should be summarized from its value.
• Note that, when naming as Jenkins, it means the resource itself, but when naming as Jenkin Implementation On PKC, it consists of more context information therefore is more suitable.
• I was intending to name "PKC Workflow/Jenkins Integration" for the PCK Workflow's submodel. However, a more proper name might be Task/Jenkins Integration, and then take its output to PKC Workflow/Automation. The organization of the PKC Workflow should be the project, and the Workflow should be the desired output of the project. The Task category is for moving to that state. So the task could be the process of a Project, and the output of the task could serve as the process of the workflow.
• Each goal is associated with a static plan and dynamic process.

• To specify input and output from a logic model, we could get the input/output on every subprocess in the process (by transclusion)
• I renamed some models
  • TLA+ Workflow -> System Verification
  • Docker Workflow -> Docker registry
  • Question: How should we name? Naming is a kind of summarization that loses information.

Logic Model (PKC Workflow) Template:LogicModel 02 13, 2022
Abstract Specification Context This is the 2021 summer project of Tz-Chuang starting from June 27, 2021 to August 21,2021. Despite the various models for domain knowledge, there isn't a high-level model which is expressive, compact, practical, and independent of domains. This gives rise to Logic Model. Goal Utilize formal methods to prove the system's soundness Use Logic Model to describe the project itself. Theorize Logic Model based on the implementation. Success Criteria An example of how the formal method could integrate into Logic Model is demonstrated. The Logic Models of the project are defined correctly The core concepts which explain the Logic Model is defined.
Concrete Implementation Given Inputs When Process is executed... Then, we get Outputs System Verification Software/TLA+ Tools PKC System Specification Knowledge/TLA+ Tools Jenkins Integration Jenkins setup A service namespace Docker Registry Docker Docker registry tutorial Image Naming System Verification by TLA+ Jenkins Integration Docker Registry Meeting and Communication Issues Updates All activities PKC Workflow/Knowledge PKC Workflow/Drafts PKC Workflow/Project Conclusion PKC Workflow/Presentation
Boundary/Safety Conditions of PKC Workflow 6 weeks of project time.