Existing requirements to review
# | Requirement | Validy as of | Feasibility as of until | Comments on |
|---|---|---|---|---|
US#1 | HIGH I want to deploy the sandbox with different BB candidates so that I can experience the interchangeability of software components. | NL: Still valid, but “deploy the sandbox” shouldnt be taken word by word. It is rather “access a use case with different BB candidates” |
|
|
US#2 | HIGH As an IT expert in a Ghanian ministry/contracted IT consultant I want to be able to select for each BB 1 out of 3 Govstack-Compliant applications and deploy them with a particular use-case configuration so that I can understand Govstack interoperability concept and consider using the architecture and methodology in my own digital transformation. (Owner: Taylor Downs ) | NL: Yes, same as above. |
|
|
US#3 | HIGH I want to test the performance and other metrics (e.g. latency, network speed, response time, compression, carbon footprint) so that I can evaluate the potential usage of the architecture. | NL: I would lower priority of this point or delete since it is anyhow not reflecting the real performance numbers. What do you think? |
| |
US#4 | HIGH I want to read an up-to-date documentation (technology stack, licenses, architecture diagram,…) so that I can inform myself about details of use software and architecture. | NL: Valid. |
| Sandbox team is documenting sandbox deliverables, community-wide documentation must be orchestrated to be accessible via the Portal |
US#5 | HIGH I want to experience accessibility and UX so that I can assess the usability for my target group. | NL: Doesnt feel valid anymore. It is rather something for the Online Contruction use case to use the UI Patterns |
| Link and refer to UX/UI specs |
US#6 | MEDIUM I want to create self-hosted instance of the sandbox so that I can analyze the system in a safe environment | NL: Valid. Still my assumption that this might be useful. It is what I meant with “replicable vertical prototype” | TBD | TBD Vasil Kolev jarkkohyoty Oleksii Danyliuk etc. |
US#7 | MEDIUM I want to be able to access and change source code or any other aspect in a safe environment, so that I can showcase a customized deployment to my colleagues/superiors. | NL: Valid. |
| covered by previous ones (based on working def. how to set up own cluster etc.…) |
US#8 | MEDIUM I want to get a blueprint for DevSecOps environment so that I can build up my own BB-based system. | NL: Valid. Can also only be done with documentation since it says “blueprint” not “to experience or similar” |
| covered by previous ones BUT only referring to documentation level |
US#9 | MEDIUM I want to see the infrastructure performance requirements that is needed to assess the sustainability of the BB based approach. | NL: I think it is a fair point, but rather for the documentation or a document where we gather learnings from this project. |
| metrics of our learnings will be used to document observations |
US#10 | MEDIUM I want to check the administration and maintainability concept so that I can evaluate the potentially needed Maintenace efforts. | NL: Delete | TBD with Nico Lueck Vasil Kolev | instead of delete, we should document our observations referring to this user story |
US#11 | LOW I want to save my custom sandbox deployment so that I can continue working with it another time. | NL: Delete | TBD with Nico Lueck Vasil Kolev | instead of delete, we should document our observations referring to this user story |
US#12 | LOW I want to change API so that I can test integration with the test environment of my country. | NL: Possible with the Replicable Vertical Prototype with Emulators? E.g. Exchange an emulator with a software running in my environment |
|
|
US#13 | LOW I want to get security recommendations on how to set up such an environment so that I can build a secure testing ground for my country's systems. | NL: Optional |
|
|
\uD83D\uDCCA Goals and requirements MVP
Touchpoint | Goal | General Requirements | User Story Reference |
|---|---|---|---|
Sandbox Gitbook | Inform on Sandbox infrastructure |
[TBC by tech] |
|
Public Sandbox Demo via Sandbox Gitbook | Access public demo Sandbox |
[TBC by tech] |
|
Sandbox Gitbook | Understand service design and implementation process |
|
|
Sandbox Gitbook and DIY | Take control of and investigate on the Govstack Sandbox |
[TBC by tech] |
|
\uD83D\uDDD2 Working hypotheses
It is more valuable to technical consultant if they can access a well structured documentation with the possibility to up-and-run “a Govstack” in their own cloud to investigate upon it, opposed to get somewhat very limited access to a publicly running Govstack infrastructure.
Government decision makers want to see proof that the concept of Govstack works in practice with use cases they can relate to.
Government decision makers are generally more curious about economic factors than technical details, from a certain point onwards technical experts are involved to investigate on details.
It should be convenient and fast to get in touch with experts for government decision makers and technical experts as well.
\uD83D\uDDD2 Non-functional requirements
Requirement | Notes |
|---|---|
Mobile first design and full responsive | |
Maintainability and accessibility of service | |
Integration of services in existing marketing infrastructure | |
Accessible via sandbox.govstack.global |
Out of Scope
Out of scope requirement or feature | Reasoning | Notes |
|---|---|---|
Separate use case environments for user groups or users |
| |
Individually built portal frontend |
|
Notes
MVP decisions
publicly accessible USCT and Djibouti Use case will run permanently and openly accessible
they will be reset every X hours to a defined default state
portal should give possibility to request support for DIY environment (DEV SUPPORT/SERVICE)
not defined yet: how and where will the deliverables be exposed?
depending on the questions:
what's the name of it?
is the product of the portal self-built, within wordpress or something else, such as gitbook?
this will be decided when wireframes are reviewed and scope for mvp is clarified
Action Items
- update goals and features and afterwards, wireframe current understanding of portal/demo/sandbox Jonas Bergmeier
- define default state for usct (seed data) and research on how to reset to this state over time Oleksii Danyliuk
- how to expose USCT (and later on Djibouti) publicly? jarkkohyoty
- Gitbook subscription expansion vs. other tooling → final check with stakeholders Oleksii Danyliuk
- Gitbook team sync / intro Oleksii Danyliuk
Open Questions
(As of )
Question | Answer | Notes and questions (to answer the question) | Date Answered |
|---|---|---|---|
How do we provide isolation between the clients? | The first version of public use case (USCT) wouldn’t include multi tenancy, or client separation logic. System is going to refresh predefined data on schedule base or on demand. |
|
|
Are we able to provide separate kubernetes clusters? | In general yes. |
|
|
Can they be forked for separate customers? | Deliverables can be forked:
|
|
|
Can namespaces be used to separate “customers”? |
|
| |
Can we use separate xRoads to separate env.? |
|
| |
How long do we expect users to use the sandbox? |
|
|
|
How do we deploy the different parts of a scenario? |
|
|
|
How to provide access to sandbox? |
| We already have achievement with cognition/magiclink. Maybe we should continue. |
|
Registration? - Auth etc. |
|
|
|
What explicit scenarios are there regarding the technical collaboration between a government and Govstack and how can a portal support this? |
|
| |
Can the portal be cloud agnostic? | looks like this is not achievable currently |
|
|
How can deployment of products be automated? |
|
|
|
Git repositories | https://github.com/GovStackWorkingGroup/sandbox-app-portal-backend |
|
|
Is 'portal' a fitting name? |
| Could be decided after concept phase |
|
Scenarios for technical implementation
Oleksii Danyliuk Vasil Kolevjarkkohyoty
Name | Scenario A | Scenario B | Scenario C |
|---|---|---|---|
Description |
|
→ cannot be provided because we can not provide the degree of isolation → → → might not be feasible at this stage → experimentation → retention policy → no “raw” access to infrastructure would be given |
|
Benefits | |||
Drawbacks and limitations | |||
Open questions | |||
Conclusion |
→ Conclusion: examination, prototyping and research on scenario B is needed
Action Items
- review existing user stories from December 2022 Nico Lueck jarkkohyoty Vasil Kolev Meelis Zujev (Deactivated)
- Oleksii Danyliuk Artun Gürkan jarkkohyoty Jonas Bergmeier sleep it over and follow-up
- finish architecture scenarios table and decide on next steps and visualize architecture that is decided upon Oleksii Danyliuk jarkkohyoty Vasil Kolev
outline draft of portal goals and, if possible, explicit featuresJonas Bergmeier- decide on goals for running and upcoming sprint and align with stakeholders
- set up follow up for Friday
Action items from
present:
- Oleksii Danyliuk comparison table between scenarios to materialize the Govstack Sandbox infrastructure and on-top assumptions, align with jarkkohyoty and Vasil Kolev
- Vasil Kolev in support of Jonas Bergmeier visualize what’s imagined
- Nico Lueck please review feasibility
- align on portal in context of all (marketing) deliverables in Govstack ecosystem Jonas Bergmeier
🎯 Target Audience (Summary of Discussion)
Portal must be easily accessible and navigable for different groups with different technical knowledge and experience
A specific target group won’t be defined because EVERYONE with genuine interest in Govstack can access the portal in order to understand Govstack from different perspectives
Portal should not be in conflict or competition with other govstack dev resources
Portal should provide added value from ALL perspectives, such as service design, cloud and infrastructure, resulting use case prototypes, Sandbox, …
🏗️ Outline (Summary of Discussion)
examination, prototyping and research on if and how to add x+1 namespaces to one cluster and the security-related consequences that come around with this Oleksii Danyliuk
Identification and registration of tenants (client management)
what is this needed for?
pick up previous work with Magic Link etc.
Infrastructure / Dashboard with Kubernetes and xRoad API
general iA for the portal Jonas Bergmeier
Use Case analysis process / practical country implementation
blocked by Djibouti Analysis until approx.
materialisation of analysis in click through prototype
provide links to repositories and other resources
Add Comment