From Denis.Caromel at inria.fr Thu Feb 13 18:13:10 2014 From: Denis.Caromel at inria.fr (Denis Caromel) Date: Thu, 13 Feb 2014 18:13:10 +0100 Subject: [Fiware-ga] IMPORTANT Project extension In-Reply-To: <52AEF232.2040709@tid.es> References: <69AD1A9684E7184DADBE43806285BA9D07713571@S-DC-ESTF03-B.net1.cec.eu.int> <52AEF232.2040709@tid.es> Message-ID: <52FCFD26.8050804@inria.fr> Dear Juanjo, What is the current status of the extension ? - Is it formally validated until the end of August 2014 ? - Can we have an official document stating this ? Thanks very much in advance, Best regards, Denis On 16/12/2013 13:29, Juanjo Hierro wrote: > Hi all, > > We need to carry out a final voting about whether to extend or not > the FI-WARE project. For this purpose, I have setup the following > doodle poll. You have to cast what of the different statements in > the columns better reflect your position *before Wed**nesday EOB*: > > http://doodle.com/3qk3rn5afh6vne39 > > > Essentially you can choose between three options: > > * OPTION 1: I can live with the extension provided that deliverables > are delayed 4 months. > * OPTION 2: I can live with the extension provided that I can finish > my contributions to deliverables as originally planned so no > significant contributions are expected from us after month 36 > other than the support described in the FI-PPP Collaboration > Agreement. My coordination role will be taken over by other after > month 36. > * I object to any kind of extension > > > > Note that extension of the duration of the project will not be > accompanied by any extension of the funding. > > We have discussed this issue extensively, so we believe that the > deadline is not so tight. > > Attached below, you can find the email that our PO, Arian Zweggers, > regarding responses to a number of considerations about extension of > the project. > > Cheers, > > -- Juanjo > > ------------- > Product Development and Innovation (PDI) - Telefonica Digital > website:www.tid.es > email:jhierro at tid.es > twitter: twitter.com/JuanjoHierro > > FI-WARE (European Future Internet Core Platform) Coordinator > and Chief Architect > > FI-PPP Architecture Board chairman > > You can follow FI-WARE at: > website:http://www.fi-ware.eu > facebook:http://www.facebook.com/pages/FI-WARE/251366491587242 > twitter:http://twitter.com/FIware > linkedIn:http://www.linkedin.com/groups/FIWARE-4239932 > > > -------- Original Message -------- > Subject: RE: FI-WARE Project extension > Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2013 16:46:50 +0000 > From: > To: > CC: > > > > Dear Juanjo, > > 1)This will depend largely on the outcome of the Dec 18 review. The > whole purpose is to direct efforts to parts which will/do contribute > to the ultimate success of the PPP, and to move FI-WARE into FI-PPP > phase 3 mode. I'm not a fortune teller, but -- based on the previous > review report and other indications -- I could imagine the following: > > ?Support, dissemination, and training will indeed be essential, as > well as cooperation with XIFI, expansion, sustainability, and > hand-over to the TFE project. > > ?Certain GEi developments will be stopped. Some of them might be > started again, but in a different fashion and with a different owner, > or using a competition approach. > > ?GERIs/GEis should be properly packaged and made publicly available, > including documentation, manuals, videos, tutorials, etc. Focus on > supportive materials, focus on making GE implementations usable. > > ?GE REFERENCE implementations, and not just GEis, should be developed. > We need to move towards true _reference_ implementations of _open_ > specifications. Appropriate processes need to be put in place for > third parties to comment on and influence the specifications, and for > third parties to cross-reference a GERI and its GE specification. The > GERIs should document how the specification was interpreted via > implementation decisions. > > ?Related to the point above, GE validation, including redress, by > third parties (incl phase 2 projects) need proper processes and > mechanisms (see page 4, review report). > > ?In addition, mechanisms need to be put in place for truly OPEN (and > not just public) specifications (see page 5 review report) > > ?Prioritisation of GEs (see review report page 5) and consequences. > This should be presented at the review meeting on Dec 18. > > ?Clarity on status: cockpit, Catalogue Testbed, FI-LAB, GE + GEi > status and planning was and is still unclear. The cockpit is not > up-to-date, partners start developing "components", "optional > extensions" (what are those?), etc. It is impossible to get a good > overview. > > ?Continuation of exploitation activities including clarification of T&Cs. > > ?Increased focus in year 3 on dissemination, contests, Startup > Weekends, etc. This should be presented in the review meeting. > > ?Expansion towards smart cities and internationally: what is planned > and what can be achieved at the end of the project? Also to be > presented at the review meeting. > > ?Increasing support to phase 2 projects and third parties, where needed > > 2)For the majority of the work in a specific GE, yes. But I understand > GE specifications and implementations are living artefacts. Therefore, > it would seem logical to me that support, modifications based on > feedback, etc continue until the end of the project. It cannot be that > feedback from use case projects is ignored because it came at month 34. > > 3)That does not make sense to me. It should be month 40. Of course, if > partners think they can have their contribution at month 36, they can > obviously send it to the WP leader at month 36. > > 4)Yes > > 5)Yes > > Best regards, > > Arian. > > *From:*Juanjo Hierro [mailto:jhierro at tid.es] > *Sent:* Saturday, November 02, 2013 1:39 PM > *To:* ZWEGERS Arian (CNECT) > *Cc:* jhierro >> "Juan J. Hierro" > *Subject:* FI-WARE Project extension > > Dear Arian, > > As already commented to Jesus and you, we have opened a thread of > discussion within FI-WARE about an extension of 4 months to the > project in line with the recommendation given in the last review report. > > In order to give a definitive answer, some partners are asking for > some elaborated answer to the following questions: > > 1.What kind of activities are foreseen during the extended period ? > Would they only be related to support, dissemination and training ? > > 2.Will a given FI-WARE GEi owner be able to chose between a) closing > its contribution to FI-WARE GE Open Specifications and its FI-WARE GEi > development activities as already planned in the DoW (i.e., delivering > updated GE Open Specifications as well as GEi software, testing plans > and related documentation in month 33, that is end of January) or b) > delay them to be in month 36 ? Ability to choose would be certainly > useful, because some GEi owners can adapt to the extension provided > that a delay in deliverables is approved, while others can live with > the extension but provided that they can close their activities in the > dates originally planned in the DoW. Telefonica, as coordinator, > doesn't see any problem allowing a partner to close its activities as > planned in the DoW. Just to avoid any burden we most probably would > submit all the mentioned deliverables in month 36 (despite some > partners would submit them internally at month 33) > > 3.Could month 36 be preserved as the date for submission of > deliverables in WP11 (exploitation) ? > > 4.Could month 40 be defined as the date for submission of deliverables > linked to WP12 (communication, collaboration and dissemination) ? > > 5.Can partners assuming a WPL or WPA role discontinue that role in > month 36 if another partner is ready to take over their role until the > end of the project ? > > > Could you please answer these questions ? This and any other > information that may be helpful to understand what the extension will > mean in terms of workload would be certainly helpful to reach an > agreement within the consortia as we would love to during this > upcoming week. > > Best regards, > > > -- Juanjo > > ------------- > Product Development and Innovation (PDI) - Telefonica Digital > website:www.tid.es > email:jhierro at tid.es > twitter: twitter.com/JuanjoHierro > > FI-WARE (European Future Internet Core Platform) Coordinator > and Chief Architect > > FI-PPP Architecture Board chairman > > You can follow FI-WARE at: > website:http://www.fi-ware.eu > facebook:http://www.facebook.com/pages/FI-WARE/251366491587242 > twitter:http://twitter.com/FIware > linkedIn:http://www.linkedin.com/groups/FIWARE-4239932 > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > Este mensaje se dirige exclusivamente a su destinatario. Puede > consultar nuestra pol?tica de env?o y recepci?n de correo electr?nico > en el enlace situado m?s abajo. > This message is intended exclusively for its addressee. We only send > and receive email on the basis of the terms set out at: > http://www.tid.es/ES/PAGINAS/disclaimer.aspx > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > Este mensaje se dirige exclusivamente a su destinatario. Puede > consultar nuestra pol?tica de env?o y recepci?n de correo electr?nico > en el enlace situado m?s abajo. > This message is intended exclusively for its addressee. We only send > and receive email on the basis of the terms set out at: > http://www.tid.es/ES/PAGINAS/disclaimer.aspx > > > _______________________________________________ > Fiware mailing list > Fiware at lists.fi-ware.eu > https://lists.fi-ware.eu/listinfo/fiware -- Denis Caromel mailto:caromel at unice.fr Tel.: +33 49 238 7631 Fax: 7644 Professor http://www-sop.inria.fr/oasis/caromel IUF, Institut universitaire de France Univ. de Nice Sophia Antipolis INRIA, 2004 Rt. des Lucioles,BP93 OASIS, INRIA - I3S CNRS - UNSA F-06902 Sophia Antipolis Cedex -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jhierro at tid.es Thu Feb 13 19:01:51 2014 From: jhierro at tid.es (Juanjo Hierro) Date: Thu, 13 Feb 2014 19:01:51 +0100 Subject: [Fiware-ga] IMPORTANT Project extension In-Reply-To: <52FCFD26.8050804@inria.fr> References: <69AD1A9684E7184DADBE43806285BA9D07713571@S-DC-ESTF03-B.net1.cec.eu.int> <52AEF232.2040709@tid.es> <52FCFD26.8050804@inria.fr> Message-ID: <52FD088F.4070205@tid.es> Extension to month 40 (end of August) is one of the points covered in the current amendment of the DoW under way ... However, this amendment has not been approved yet (our PO, Arian Zwegers is on holidays). However, the point has been extensively discussed with Arian and he agrees with that extension. I don't foreseen any risk that the project will not be extended. Hope this answer helps, -- Juanjo ------------- Product Development and Innovation (PDI) - Telefonica Digital website: www.tid.es email: jhierro at tid.es twitter: twitter.com/JuanjoHierro FI-WARE (European Future Internet Core Platform) Coordinator and Chief Architect FI-PPP Architecture Board chairman You can follow FI-WARE at: website: http://www.fi-ware.eu facebook: http://www.facebook.com/pages/FI-WARE/251366491587242 twitter: http://twitter.com/FIware linkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/groups/FIWARE-4239932 On 13/02/14 18:13, Denis Caromel wrote: Dear Juanjo, What is the current status of the extension ? - Is it formally validated until the end of August 2014 ? - Can we have an official document stating this ? Thanks very much in advance, Best regards, Denis On 16/12/2013 13:29, Juanjo Hierro wrote: Hi all, We need to carry out a final voting about whether to extend or not the FI-WARE project. For this purpose, I have setup the following doodle poll. You have to cast what of the different statements in the columns better reflect your position before Wednesday EOB: http://doodle.com/3qk3rn5afh6vne39 Essentially you can choose between three options: * OPTION 1: I can live with the extension provided that deliverables are delayed 4 months. * OPTION 2: I can live with the extension provided that I can finish my contributions to deliverables as originally planned so no significant contributions are expected from us after month 36 other than the support described in the FI-PPP Collaboration Agreement. My coordination role will be taken over by other after month 36. * I object to any kind of extension Note that extension of the duration of the project will not be accompanied by any extension of the funding. We have discussed this issue extensively, so we believe that the deadline is not so tight. Attached below, you can find the email that our PO, Arian Zweggers, regarding responses to a number of considerations about extension of the project. Cheers, -- Juanjo ------------- Product Development and Innovation (PDI) - Telefonica Digital website: www.tid.es email: jhierro at tid.es twitter: twitter.com/JuanjoHierro FI-WARE (European Future Internet Core Platform) Coordinator and Chief Architect FI-PPP Architecture Board chairman You can follow FI-WARE at: website: http://www.fi-ware.eu facebook: http://www.facebook.com/pages/FI-WARE/251366491587242 twitter: http://twitter.com/FIware linkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/groups/FIWARE-4239932 -------- Original Message -------- Subject: RE: FI-WARE Project extension Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2013 16:46:50 +0000 From: To: CC: Dear Juanjo, 1) This will depend largely on the outcome of the Dec 18 review. The whole purpose is to direct efforts to parts which will/do contribute to the ultimate success of the PPP, and to move FI-WARE into FI-PPP phase 3 mode. I'm not a fortune teller, but - based on the previous review report and other indications - I could imagine the following: ? Support, dissemination, and training will indeed be essential, as well as cooperation with XIFI, expansion, sustainability, and hand-over to the TFE project. ? Certain GEi developments will be stopped. Some of them might be started again, but in a different fashion and with a different owner, or using a competition approach. ? GERIs/GEis should be properly packaged and made publicly available, including documentation, manuals, videos, tutorials, etc. Focus on supportive materials, focus on making GE implementations usable. ? GE REFERENCE implementations, and not just GEis, should be developed. We need to move towards true reference implementations of open specifications. Appropriate processes need to be put in place for third parties to comment on and influence the specifications, and for third parties to cross-reference a GERI and its GE specification. The GERIs should document how the specification was interpreted via implementation decisions. ? Related to the point above, GE validation, including redress, by third parties (incl phase 2 projects) need proper processes and mechanisms (see page 4, review report). ? In addition, mechanisms need to be put in place for truly OPEN (and not just public) specifications (see page 5 review report) ? Prioritisation of GEs (see review report page 5) and consequences. This should be presented at the review meeting on Dec 18. ? Clarity on status: cockpit, Catalogue Testbed, FI-LAB, GE + GEi status and planning was and is still unclear. The cockpit is not up-to-date, partners start developing "components", "optional extensions" (what are those?), etc. It is impossible to get a good overview. ? Continuation of exploitation activities including clarification of T&Cs. ? Increased focus in year 3 on dissemination, contests, Startup Weekends, etc. This should be presented in the review meeting. ? Expansion towards smart cities and internationally: what is planned and what can be achieved at the end of the project? Also to be presented at the review meeting. ? Increasing support to phase 2 projects and third parties, where needed 2) For the majority of the work in a specific GE, yes. But I understand GE specifications and implementations are living artefacts. Therefore, it would seem logical to me that support, modifications based on feedback, etc continue until the end of the project. It cannot be that feedback from use case projects is ignored because it came at month 34. 3) That does not make sense to me. It should be month 40. Of course, if partners think they can have their contribution at month 36, they can obviously send it to the WP leader at month 36. 4) Yes 5) Yes Best regards, Arian. From: Juanjo Hierro [mailto:jhierro at tid.es] Sent: Saturday, November 02, 2013 1:39 PM To: ZWEGERS Arian (CNECT) Cc: jhierro >> "Juan J. Hierro" Subject: FI-WARE Project extension Dear Arian, As already commented to Jesus and you, we have opened a thread of discussion within FI-WARE about an extension of 4 months to the project in line with the recommendation given in the last review report. In order to give a definitive answer, some partners are asking for some elaborated answer to the following questions: 1. What kind of activities are foreseen during the extended period ? Would they only be related to support, dissemination and training ? 2. Will a given FI-WARE GEi owner be able to chose between a) closing its contribution to FI-WARE GE Open Specifications and its FI-WARE GEi development activities as already planned in the DoW (i.e., delivering updated GE Open Specifications as well as GEi software, testing plans and related documentation in month 33, that is end of January) or b) delay them to be in month 36 ? Ability to choose would be certainly useful, because some GEi owners can adapt to the extension provided that a delay in deliverables is approved, while others can live with the extension but provided that they can close their activities in the dates originally planned in the DoW. Telefonica, as coordinator, doesn't see any problem allowing a partner to close its activities as planned in the DoW. Just to avoid any burden we most probably would submit all the mentioned deliverables in month 36 (despite some partners would submit them internally at month 33) 3. Could month 36 be preserved as the date for submission of deliverables in WP11 (exploitation) ? 4. Could month 40 be defined as the date for submission of deliverables linked to WP12 (communication, collaboration and dissemination) ? 5. Can partners assuming a WPL or WPA role discontinue that role in month 36 if another partner is ready to take over their role until the end of the project ? Could you please answer these questions ? This and any other information that may be helpful to understand what the extension will mean in terms of workload would be certainly helpful to reach an agreement within the consortia as we would love to during this upcoming week. Best regards, -- Juanjo ------------- Product Development and Innovation (PDI) - Telefonica Digital website: www.tid.es email: jhierro at tid.es twitter: twitter.com/JuanjoHierro FI-WARE (European Future Internet Core Platform) Coordinator and Chief Architect FI-PPP Architecture Board chairman You can follow FI-WARE at: website: http://www.fi-ware.eu facebook: http://www.facebook.com/pages/FI-WARE/251366491587242 twitter: http://twitter.com/FIware linkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/groups/FIWARE-4239932 ________________________________ Este mensaje se dirige exclusivamente a su destinatario. Puede consultar nuestra pol?tica de env?o y recepci?n de correo electr?nico en el enlace situado m?s abajo. This message is intended exclusively for its addressee. We only send and receive email on the basis of the terms set out at: http://www.tid.es/ES/PAGINAS/disclaimer.aspx ________________________________ Este mensaje se dirige exclusivamente a su destinatario. Puede consultar nuestra pol?tica de env?o y recepci?n de correo electr?nico en el enlace situado m?s abajo. This message is intended exclusively for its addressee. We only send and receive email on the basis of the terms set out at: http://www.tid.es/ES/PAGINAS/disclaimer.aspx _______________________________________________ Fiware mailing list Fiware at lists.fi-ware.eu https://lists.fi-ware.eu/listinfo/fiware -- Denis Caromel mailto:caromel at unice.fr Tel.: +33 49 238 7631 Fax: 7644 Professor http://www-sop.inria.fr/oasis/caromel IUF, Institut universitaire de France Univ. de Nice Sophia Antipolis INRIA, 2004 Rt. des Lucioles,BP93 OASIS, INRIA - I3S CNRS - UNSA F-06902 Sophia Antipolis Cedex ________________________________ Este mensaje se dirige exclusivamente a su destinatario. Puede consultar nuestra pol?tica de env?o y recepci?n de correo electr?nico en el enlace situado m?s abajo. This message is intended exclusively for its addressee. We only send and receive email on the basis of the terms set out at: http://www.tid.es/ES/PAGINAS/disclaimer.aspx -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jhierro at tid.es Mon Feb 17 16:56:46 2014 From: jhierro at tid.es (Juanjo Hierro) Date: Mon, 17 Feb 2014 16:56:46 +0100 Subject: [Fiware-ga] Fwd: Grant Agreement No. 285248 FI-WARE - Financial assessment for reporting period P2 from 01/05/2012 to 30/04/2013 In-Reply-To: <15355345.59151392374367173.JavaMail.infso-prodintra@S-INFSO-WEB2> References: <15355345.59151392374367173.JavaMail.infso-prodintra@S-INFSO-WEB2> Message-ID: <5302313E.4070902@tid.es> Hi all, I forward this info as soon as I have detected it in my inbox. I haven't had time to analyze it. Best regards, -- Juanjo ------------- Product Development and Innovation (PDI) - Telefonica Digital website: www.tid.es email: jhierro at tid.es twitter: twitter.com/JuanjoHierro FI-WARE (European Future Internet Core Platform) Coordinator and Chief Architect FI-PPP Architecture Board chairman You can follow FI-WARE at: website: http://www.fi-ware.eu facebook: http://www.facebook.com/pages/FI-WARE/251366491587242 twitter: http://twitter.com/FIware linkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/groups/FIWARE-4239932 -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Grant Agreement No. 285248 FI-WARE - Financial assessment for reporting period P2 from 01/05/2012 to 30/04/2013 Date: Fri, 14 Feb 2014 11:39:27 +0100 From: To: CC: , , , Dear Mr. Hierro Sureda, I wish to advise you that the reports mentioned in Article 4 of Annex II to the grant agreement in reference, and submitted to the Commission on 26/09/2013, for the reporting period P2 from 01/05/2012 to 30/04/2013 have been examined. The results of the analysis of the financial statement are detailed in the attached financial statement acceptance forms. In summary a payment of 11.981.989 EUR will be made. We wish to draw your attention to the following: * According to Article II.22 of the grant agreement, the Commission may, at any time during the implementation of the project and up to five years after the end of the project, arrange for financial audits to be carried out, by external auditors, or by the Commission services themselves including OLAF. * According to Article II.23 of the grant agreement, the Commission may initiate a technical audit or review at any time during the implementation of the project and up to five years after the end of the project. The payment of the Union financial contribution to the coordinator discharges the Commission from its obligation on payments to the other beneficiaries. Therefore, you shall ensure that all the appropriate payments are made to them without unjustified delay (see Articles II.2 and II.3). Furthermore note that according to the provisions of the Financial Regulation and of the grant agreement, sums due to the Union by a beneficiary may be recovered by offsetting them against any sums it owes to the beneficiary concerned, after informing the latter accordingly. Please inform the other beneficiaries of the results of the financial assessment for this reporting period. Yours sincerely, ZWEGERS Arian email Arian.ZWEGERS at ec.europa.eu Project Officer ________________________________ Este mensaje se dirige exclusivamente a su destinatario. Puede consultar nuestra pol?tica de env?o y recepci?n de correo electr?nico en el enlace situado m?s abajo. This message is intended exclusively for its addressee. We only send and receive email on the basis of the terms set out at: http://www.tid.es/ES/PAGINAS/disclaimer.aspx -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 1408914.PDF Type: application/octet-stream Size: 46692 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 1408912.PDF Type: application/octet-stream Size: 776551 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 1408915.PDF Type: application/octet-stream Size: 30556 bytes Desc: not available URL: From jhierro at tid.es Mon Feb 17 19:34:13 2014 From: jhierro at tid.es (Juanjo Hierro) Date: Mon, 17 Feb 2014 19:34:13 +0100 Subject: [Fiware-ga] Fwd: RE: Ares(2014)204452 - FI-WARE Clarifications regarding RP2 ARES(2014) 347150 In-Reply-To: <69AD1A9684E7184DADBE43806285BA9D0779B031@S-DC-ESTF03-B.net1.cec.eu.int> References: <69AD1A9684E7184DADBE43806285BA9D0779B031@S-DC-ESTF03-B.net1.cec.eu.int> Message-ID: <53025625.2070007@tid.es> Hi all, Some of you are asking for a copy of the "outcome letter" that uses to be referred in file 1408912.PDF of the assessment of reported costs ... Please bear in mind that this assessment of costs by the EC correspond to the second reporting period, thus is matches the month 24 review and not the month 30 review. Consequently, you all should have the outcome letter and detailed review report of month 24. Nevertheless, I have attached both documents to this email. Besides this, our PO has just sent to me a file which should help to establish the link between review reports and the assessment of reported costs for the second reporting period. Please find it also attached. Hope it helps to analyze/understand the rejection of costs. Best regards, -- Juanjo ------------- Product Development and Innovation (PDI) - Telefonica Digital website: www.tid.es email: jhierro at tid.es twitter: twitter.com/JuanjoHierro FI-WARE (European Future Internet Core Platform) Coordinator and Chief Architect FI-PPP Architecture Board chairman You can follow FI-WARE at: website: http://www.fi-ware.eu facebook: http://www.facebook.com/pages/FI-WARE/251366491587242 twitter: http://twitter.com/FIware linkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/groups/FIWARE-4239932 -------- Original Message -------- Subject: RE: Ares(2014)204452 - FI-WARE Clarifications regarding RP2 ARES(2014) 347150 Date: Mon, 17 Feb 2014 18:03:11 +0000 From: To: , , CC: , Dear Juanjo, Attached is the missing link between review reports and Excel sheet. Best regards, Arian From: Juanjo Hierro [mailto:jhierro at tid.es] Sent: Monday, February 17, 2014 6:47 PM To: ANDRIES Stephane (CNECT); jdps at tid.es Cc: subsidies at tid.es; ZWEGERS Arian (CNECT); CNECT-ICT-285248; jhierro >> "Juan J. Hierro" Subject: Re: Ares(2014)204452 - FI-WARE Clarifications regarding RP2 ARES(2014) 347150 Dear Stephane/Arian, The Finantial Assessment has arrived but we look for the rationale of some costs rejection, references to a "outcome letter of the review" are provided. As an example, the justification of rejection of some costs reported by Telef?nica I+D refer to this outcome letter of the review (literally it is said "see outcome letter of the review", please check page 1/87 of file 1408912.PDF). This applies to many other partners. However we haven't found the outcome letter of the review at any time. Or at least we haven't found it sent by the EC. As a consequence, it is difficult for us to understand the rationale behind rejection of some costs. We would rather appreciate if you can forward this information as soon as possible. Best regards, -- Juanjo Hierro ------------- Product Development and Innovation (PDI) - Telefonica Digital website: www.tid.es email: jhierro at tid.es twitter: twitter.com/JuanjoHierro FI-WARE (European Future Internet Core Platform) Coordinator and Chief Architect FI-PPP Architecture Board chairman You can follow FI-WARE at: website: http://www.fi-ware.eu facebook: http://www.facebook.com/pages/FI-WARE/251366491587242 twitter: http://twitter.com/FIware linkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/groups/FIWARE-4239932 ________________________________ Este mensaje se dirige exclusivamente a su destinatario. Puede consultar nuestra pol?tica de env?o y recepci?n de correo electr?nico en el enlace situado m?s abajo. This message is intended exclusively for its addressee. We only send and receive email on the basis of the terms set out at: http://www.tid.es/ES/PAGINAS/disclaimer.aspx -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: FI-WARE Rejection of costs RP2.doc Type: application/msword Size: 82944 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: FI-WARE Review 5 Report (month 24).pdf Type: application/forcedownload Size: 714317 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Outcome FI-WARE review 5 report (month 24).docx.pdf Type: application/forcedownload Size: 183517 bytes Desc: not available URL: From markus.heller at sap.com Tue Feb 18 09:49:13 2014 From: markus.heller at sap.com (Heller, Markus) Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2014 08:49:13 +0000 Subject: [Fiware-ga] [Fiware-administrative] Fwd: RE: Ares(2014)204452 - FI-WARE Clarifications regarding RP2 ARES(2014) 347150 In-Reply-To: <53025625.2070007@tid.es> References: <69AD1A9684E7184DADBE43806285BA9D0779B031@S-DC-ESTF03-B.net1.cec.eu.int> <53025625.2070007@tid.es> Message-ID: <393554EDCF801348BC53C7813C6CB73B1AD14134@DEWDFEMB14A.global.corp.sap> Daer all, I would like to discuss per mail some questions and the consortium overall response - but I guess not the whole FI-WORL world needs to be involved in this follow-up. Personally I assume, not all mailing list need to be involved here (Fiware-all?). Is it possible, that we rather please just name a few mailing list (not all possible) and move the follow-up discussion on this mailing list? Best wishes Markus From: fiware-administrative-bounces at lists.fi-ware.eu [mailto:fiware-administrative-bounces at lists.fi-ware.eu] On Behalf Of Juanjo Hierro Sent: Montag, 17. Februar 2014 19:34 To: fiware at lists.fi-ware.eu; fiware-wpl at lists.fi-ware.eu; fiware-wpa at lists.fi-ware.eu; fiware-ga at lists.fi-ware.eu; 'fiware-administrative at lists.fi-ware.eu' Subject: [Fiware-administrative] Fwd: RE: Ares(2014)204452 - FI-WARE Clarifications regarding RP2 ARES(2014) 347150 Hi all, Some of you are asking for a copy of the "outcome letter" that uses to be referred in file 1408912.PDF of the assessment of reported costs ... Please bear in mind that this assessment of costs by the EC correspond to the second reporting period, thus is matches the month 24 review and not the month 30 review. Consequently, you all should have the outcome letter and detailed review report of month 24. Nevertheless, I have attached both documents to this email. Besides this, our PO has just sent to me a file which should help to establish the link between review reports and the assessment of reported costs for the second reporting period. Please find it also attached. Hope it helps to analyze/understand the rejection of costs. Best regards, -- Juanjo ------------- Product Development and Innovation (PDI) - Telefonica Digital website: www.tid.es email: jhierro at tid.es twitter: twitter.com/JuanjoHierro FI-WARE (European Future Internet Core Platform) Coordinator and Chief Architect FI-PPP Architecture Board chairman You can follow FI-WARE at: website: http://www.fi-ware.eu facebook: http://www.facebook.com/pages/FI-WARE/251366491587242 twitter: http://twitter.com/FIware linkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/groups/FIWARE-4239932 -------- Original Message -------- Subject: RE: Ares(2014)204452 - FI-WARE Clarifications regarding RP2 ARES(2014) 347150 Date: Mon, 17 Feb 2014 18:03:11 +0000 From: To: , , CC: , Dear Juanjo, Attached is the missing link between review reports and Excel sheet. Best regards, Arian From: Juanjo Hierro [mailto:jhierro at tid.es] Sent: Monday, February 17, 2014 6:47 PM To: ANDRIES Stephane (CNECT); jdps at tid.es Cc: subsidies at tid.es; ZWEGERS Arian (CNECT); CNECT-ICT-285248; jhierro >> "Juan J. Hierro" Subject: Re: Ares(2014)204452 - FI-WARE Clarifications regarding RP2 ARES(2014) 347150 Dear Stephane/Arian, The Finantial Assessment has arrived but we look for the rationale of some costs rejection, references to a "outcome letter of the review" are provided. As an example, the justification of rejection of some costs reported by Telef?nica I+D refer to this outcome letter of the review (literally it is said "see outcome letter of the review", please check page 1/87 of file 1408912.PDF). This applies to many other partners. However we haven't found the outcome letter of the review at any time. Or at least we haven't found it sent by the EC. As a consequence, it is difficult for us to understand the rationale behind rejection of some costs. We would rather appreciate if you can forward this information as soon as possible. Best regards, -- Juanjo Hierro ------------- Product Development and Innovation (PDI) - Telefonica Digital website: www.tid.es email: jhierro at tid.es twitter: twitter.com/JuanjoHierro FI-WARE (European Future Internet Core Platform) Coordinator and Chief Architect FI-PPP Architecture Board chairman You can follow FI-WARE at: website: http://www.fi-ware.eu facebook: http://www.facebook.com/pages/FI-WARE/251366491587242 twitter: http://twitter.com/FIware linkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/groups/FIWARE-4239932 ________________________________ Este mensaje se dirige exclusivamente a su destinatario. Puede consultar nuestra pol?tica de env?o y recepci?n de correo electr?nico en el enlace situado m?s abajo. This message is intended exclusively for its addressee. We only send and receive email on the basis of the terms set out at: http://www.tid.es/ES/PAGINAS/disclaimer.aspx -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jdps at tid.es Tue Feb 18 14:41:56 2014 From: jdps at tid.es (JAVIER DE PEDRO SANCHEZ) Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2014 13:41:56 +0000 Subject: [Fiware-ga] [Fiware-administrative] Fwd: RE: Ares(2014)204452 - FI-WARE Clarifications regarding RP2 ARES(2014) 347150 In-Reply-To: <53025625.2070007@tid.es> References: <69AD1A9684E7184DADBE43806285BA9D0779B031@S-DC-ESTF03-B.net1.cec.eu.int> <53025625.2070007@tid.es> Message-ID: <77A22C1085494D48B4018F06A40DB2C768DEF0A3@EX10-MB2-MAD.hi.inet> Dear all, please find additional information provided by the Commission regarding accepted and rejected costs. We hope it helps to understand the calculation of the rejections. BR Javier. De: fiware-administrative-bounces at lists.fi-ware.eu [mailto:fiware-administrative-bounces at lists.fi-ware.eu] En nombre de Juanjo Hierro Enviado el: lunes, 17 de febrero de 2014 19:34 Para: fiware at lists.fi-ware.eu; fiware-wpl at lists.fi-ware.eu; fiware-wpa at lists.fi-ware.eu; fiware-ga at lists.fi-ware.eu; 'fiware-administrative at lists.fi-ware.eu' Asunto: [Fiware-administrative] Fwd: RE: Ares(2014)204452 - FI-WARE Clarifications regarding RP2 ARES(2014) 347150 Hi all, Some of you are asking for a copy of the "outcome letter" that uses to be referred in file 1408912.PDF of the assessment of reported costs ... Please bear in mind that this assessment of costs by the EC correspond to the second reporting period, thus is matches the month 24 review and not the month 30 review. Consequently, you all should have the outcome letter and detailed review report of month 24. Nevertheless, I have attached both documents to this email. Besides this, our PO has just sent to me a file which should help to establish the link between review reports and the assessment of reported costs for the second reporting period. Please find it also attached. Hope it helps to analyze/understand the rejection of costs. Best regards, -- Juanjo ------------- Product Development and Innovation (PDI) - Telefonica Digital website: www.tid.es email: jhierro at tid.es twitter: twitter.com/JuanjoHierro FI-WARE (European Future Internet Core Platform) Coordinator and Chief Architect FI-PPP Architecture Board chairman You can follow FI-WARE at: website: http://www.fi-ware.eu facebook: http://www.facebook.com/pages/FI-WARE/251366491587242 twitter: http://twitter.com/FIware linkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/groups/FIWARE-4239932 -------- Original Message -------- Subject: RE: Ares(2014)204452 - FI-WARE Clarifications regarding RP2 ARES(2014) 347150 Date: Mon, 17 Feb 2014 18:03:11 +0000 From: To: , , CC: , Dear Juanjo, Attached is the missing link between review reports and Excel sheet. Best regards, Arian From: Juanjo Hierro [mailto:jhierro at tid.es] Sent: Monday, February 17, 2014 6:47 PM To: ANDRIES Stephane (CNECT); jdps at tid.es Cc: subsidies at tid.es; ZWEGERS Arian (CNECT); CNECT-ICT-285248; jhierro >> "Juan J. Hierro" Subject: Re: Ares(2014)204452 - FI-WARE Clarifications regarding RP2 ARES(2014) 347150 Dear Stephane/Arian, The Finantial Assessment has arrived but we look for the rationale of some costs rejection, references to a "outcome letter of the review" are provided. As an example, the justification of rejection of some costs reported by Telef?nica I+D refer to this outcome letter of the review (literally it is said "see outcome letter of the review", please check page 1/87 of file 1408912.PDF). This applies to many other partners. However we haven't found the outcome letter of the review at any time. Or at least we haven't found it sent by the EC. As a consequence, it is difficult for us to understand the rationale behind rejection of some costs. We would rather appreciate if you can forward this information as soon as possible. Best regards, -- Juanjo Hierro ------------- Product Development and Innovation (PDI) - Telefonica Digital website: www.tid.es email: jhierro at tid.es twitter: twitter.com/JuanjoHierro FI-WARE (European Future Internet Core Platform) Coordinator and Chief Architect FI-PPP Architecture Board chairman You can follow FI-WARE at: website: http://www.fi-ware.eu facebook: http://www.facebook.com/pages/FI-WARE/251366491587242 twitter: http://twitter.com/FIware linkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/groups/FIWARE-4239932 ________________________________ Este mensaje se dirige exclusivamente a su destinatario. Puede consultar nuestra pol?tica de env?o y recepci?n de correo electr?nico en el enlace situado m?s abajo. This message is intended exclusively for its addressee. We only send and receive email on the basis of the terms set out at: http://www.tid.es/ES/PAGINAS/disclaimer.aspx ________________________________ Este mensaje se dirige exclusivamente a su destinatario. Puede consultar nuestra pol?tica de env?o y recepci?n de correo electr?nico en el enlace situado m?s abajo. This message is intended exclusively for its addressee. We only send and receive email on the basis of the terms set out at: http://www.tid.es/ES/PAGINAS/disclaimer.aspx -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 20131106 FI-WARE rejections RP1+2.xlsx Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.spreadsheetml.sheet Size: 522294 bytes Desc: 20131106 FI-WARE rejections RP1+2.xlsx URL: From jhierro at tid.es Tue Feb 18 20:08:28 2014 From: jhierro at tid.es (Juanjo Hierro) Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2014 20:08:28 +0100 Subject: [Fiware-ga] Fwd: About Financial assessment for reporting period P2 by the EC In-Reply-To: <5303AEC2.80703@tid.es> References: <5303AEC2.80703@tid.es> Message-ID: <5303AFAC.5060609@tid.es> Hi all, Just for your info, I have called WPLs and WPAs for a dedicated meeting on the Financial assessment for reporting period P2 by the EC. It will take place this coming Monday February 24th in the afternoon. In the meantime, I suggest that you raise any comment you believe it is relevant to either your WPL or directly to me. Best regards, -- Juanjo ------------- Product Development and Innovation (PDI) - Telefonica Digital website: www.tid.es email: jhierro at tid.es twitter: twitter.com/JuanjoHierro FI-WARE (European Future Internet Core Platform) Coordinator and Chief Architect FI-PPP Architecture Board chairman You can follow FI-WARE at: website: http://www.fi-ware.eu facebook: http://www.facebook.com/pages/FI-WARE/251366491587242 twitter: http://twitter.com/FIware linkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/groups/FIWARE-4239932 -------- Original Message -------- Subject: About Financial assessment for reporting period P2 by the EC Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2014 20:04:34 +0100 From: Juanjo Hierro To: fiware-wpl at lists.fi-ware.eu , fiware-wpa at lists.fi-ware.eu Hi all, I would like to activate the afternoon session (from 14:30 to 16:00) of our weekly WPLs/WPAs follow-up confcalls next monday February 24th to discuss the Financial assessment for reporting period P2 by the EC and analyze further actions. Please pencil this into your agendas. Best regards, -- Juanjo ------------- Product Development and Innovation (PDI) - Telefonica Digital website: www.tid.es email: jhierro at tid.es twitter: twitter.com/JuanjoHierro FI-WARE (European Future Internet Core Platform) Coordinator and Chief Architect FI-PPP Architecture Board chairman You can follow FI-WARE at: website: http://www.fi-ware.eu facebook: http://www.facebook.com/pages/FI-WARE/251366491587242 twitter: http://twitter.com/FIware linkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/groups/FIWARE-4239932 ________________________________ Este mensaje se dirige exclusivamente a su destinatario. Puede consultar nuestra pol?tica de env?o y recepci?n de correo electr?nico en el enlace situado m?s abajo. This message is intended exclusively for its addressee. We only send and receive email on the basis of the terms set out at: http://www.tid.es/ES/PAGINAS/disclaimer.aspx -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jhierro at tid.es Tue Feb 18 20:08:56 2014 From: jhierro at tid.es (Juanjo Hierro) Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2014 20:08:56 +0100 Subject: [Fiware-ga] Fwd: About Financial assessment for reporting period P2 by the EC In-Reply-To: <5303AEC2.80703@tid.es> References: <5303AEC2.80703@tid.es> Message-ID: <5303AFC8.1080407@tid.es> Hi all, Just for your info, I have called WPLs and WPAs for a dedicated meeting on the Financial assessment for reporting period P2 by the EC. It will take place this coming Monday February 24th in the afternoon. In the meantime, I suggest that you raise any comment you believe it is relevant to either your WPL or directly to me. Best regards, -- Juanjo ------------- Product Development and Innovation (PDI) - Telefonica Digital website: www.tid.es email: jhierro at tid.es twitter: twitter.com/JuanjoHierro FI-WARE (European Future Internet Core Platform) Coordinator and Chief Architect FI-PPP Architecture Board chairman You can follow FI-WARE at: website: http://www.fi-ware.eu facebook: http://www.facebook.com/pages/FI-WARE/251366491587242 twitter: http://twitter.com/FIware linkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/groups/FIWARE-4239932 -------- Original Message -------- Subject: About Financial assessment for reporting period P2 by the EC Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2014 20:04:34 +0100 From: Juanjo Hierro To: fiware-wpl at lists.fi-ware.eu , fiware-wpa at lists.fi-ware.eu Hi all, I would like to activate the afternoon session (from 14:30 to 16:00) of our weekly WPLs/WPAs follow-up confcalls next monday February 24th to discuss the Financial assessment for reporting period P2 by the EC and analyze further actions. Please pencil this into your agendas. Best regards, -- Juanjo ------------- Product Development and Innovation (PDI) - Telefonica Digital website: www.tid.es email: jhierro at tid.es twitter: twitter.com/JuanjoHierro FI-WARE (European Future Internet Core Platform) Coordinator and Chief Architect FI-PPP Architecture Board chairman You can follow FI-WARE at: website: http://www.fi-ware.eu facebook: http://www.facebook.com/pages/FI-WARE/251366491587242 twitter: http://twitter.com/FIware linkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/groups/FIWARE-4239932 ________________________________ Este mensaje se dirige exclusivamente a su destinatario. Puede consultar nuestra pol?tica de env?o y recepci?n de correo electr?nico en el enlace situado m?s abajo. This message is intended exclusively for its addressee. We only send and receive email on the basis of the terms set out at: http://www.tid.es/ES/PAGINAS/disclaimer.aspx -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mev at tid.es Mon Feb 24 08:28:38 2014 From: mev at tid.es (MANUEL ESCRICHE VICENTE) Date: Mon, 24 Feb 2014 07:28:38 +0000 Subject: [Fiware-ga] Finishing contributions - getting aligned Message-ID: <65CDBE2E7E5A964BB8BC5F4328FDE90BB31A4B0E@EX10-MB2-MAD.hi.inet> Dear Partners, Let me share with you the link below with info application of the rules to determine when partners are finishing their contributions. https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1lixgg8HuqeSrgOTh-n72zHPx0c8inlnQaH6_FBivmpo/edit?usp=sharing It has been previously shared with WPL and GE-Owners for their validation. However, if you noticed any issue, please, let me know. Kind regards, Manuel From: fiware-wpa-bounces at lists.fi-ware.eu [mailto:fiware-wpa-bounces at lists.fi-ware.eu] On Behalf Of MANUEL ESCRICHE VICENTE Sent: jueves, 13 de febrero de 2014 11:08 To: fiware-ge-owners at lists.fi-ware.eu Cc: fiware-wpl at lists.fi-ware.eu; fiware-wpa at lists.fi-ware.eu Subject: [Fiware-wpa] Finishing contributions - getting aligned Dear GE Owners, In order to get our understanding aligned on when to finish and therefore when to expect contributions of the different activities in all GEI, I dared produce the spreadsheet below where I collect input about partners votes on project extension, and about open source, and when it was declared as such, and additionally I interpret Juanjo's email with rules to identify when each GEI finishes their contribution for the different activities. https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1lixgg8HuqeSrgOTh-n72zHPx0c8inlnQaH6_FBivmpo/edit?usp=sharing It has already been validated with some partners. So now I share it with you all for complete validation. I think it's important to get same understanding, otherwise activities may run longer than due or the opposite as well, or managers may well be expecting contributions, which don't happen in time, or the opposite as well. I mean the spreadsheet purpose is to clarify interpretations and get same understanding. Please, if you noticed anything wrong, either in data or interpretation, don't hesitate to let me know. Thanks in advance! Kind regards, Manuel ---------------------------- Manuel Escriche Vicente Agile Project Manager/Leader FI-WARE Initiative Telef?nica Digital Parque Tecnol?gico C/ Abraham Zacuto, 10 47151 - Boecillo Valladolid - Spain Tfno: +34.91.312.99.72 Fax: +34.983.36.75.64 http://www.tid.es ________________________________ Este mensaje se dirige exclusivamente a su destinatario. Puede consultar nuestra pol?tica de env?o y recepci?n de correo electr?nico en el enlace situado m?s abajo. This message is intended exclusively for its addressee. We only send and receive email on the basis of the terms set out at: http://www.tid.es/ES/PAGINAS/disclaimer.aspx ________________________________ Este mensaje se dirige exclusivamente a su destinatario. Puede consultar nuestra pol?tica de env?o y recepci?n de correo electr?nico en el enlace situado m?s abajo. This message is intended exclusively for its addressee. We only send and receive email on the basis of the terms set out at: http://www.tid.es/ES/PAGINAS/disclaimer.aspx -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: ATT00001.txt URL: