[Fiware-pcc] [Fiware-wpl] Concerns with deliverables process and content... and solutions to identify before review

[stefano de panfilis]

dear thierry,

thank you for rising so important issues!

i agree the toc should  be agreed basically at the start of the work on the
specific task, to avoid people to loose time on unnecessary aspects of the
work, and i agree also that wp2 should lead the discussion on this aspect
for what concerns technical deliverables.
i also suggest to distribute the assement of the deliverable between
people, normally two rewing persons outside the specific wp or outside the
team who actually wrote the deliverable, to speed-up the actual submission
of deliverables.

using word (standaolne text based editors) is against the phylosophy of the
project that we all agree since the beginning. changing this policy is a
matter of the pcc, but i'm reluctant to do so.
by the way, there is aspecific function which allows you to check the
changes made per each wiki page.



2012/5/4 <thierry.nagellen at orange.com>

> Dear all,****
>
> ** **
>
> I would raise here a main concern regarding how we are managing our
> deliverables. Basically and since the beginning of the project we are late
> for all deliverables and it will be a strong concern for our Project
> Officer and our reviewers in less than 2 months during the review.****
>
> ** **
>
> We can split our deliverables into 2 categories: technical deliverables
> where all technical chapters have to provide their own content, and
> classical deliverables directly related to a dedicated WP.****
>
> ** **
>
> F or the t feeling and the feedback from IoT team is that we never have
> the ToC on time, which is normally 2 months before to deliver the final
> version, and when we have the ToC, guidelines are always moving especially
> during the last 2 weeks because the technical chapters did not really apply
> the guidelines (or because we are not able to manage correctly the
> consistency between chapters). In the case of these technical deliverables,
> the rule we apply is that Telefonica is the Editor because Telefonica is
> the chief architect. My main question here is: what is the role of WP2 till
> the beginning of the project? Could we use this place to prepare and
> discuss the ToC together in this place and maintain it or just small
> changes to avoid writing something in a rush at the last minute?****
>
> We could also define the GANTT with the expected deliverables and when the
> ToC should be ready.****
>
> **&nb ass=MsoNormal>For the classical deliverables, there are not managed
> as a first priority till now and we have the same concern regarding the ToC
> definition and who is responsible of what. Very often the only names put in
> a deliverable are WP Leader or WP Architect and each technical team has to
> manage partner’s contribution. When the same partners are involved in
> several WPs, it is very difficult to coordinate contributions and at the
> end to reach a good quality for the deliverable. What should be clearly
> stated is that if the skeleton of the deliverable is moving, the editor is
> responsible to adapt previous contribution to the new framework and not to
> ask 70 people to do the same work twice or three times.****
>
> ** **
>
> For both categories of deliverables, wiki format is for me not the right
> format to have working document. To track changes or to p ut right me
> especially when we change the skeleton. Furthermore, we have no clear rules
> first for the private deliverables how they will be published on the wiki
> (I’ve sent a previous email on this subject for exploitation deliverable
> but did not receive any answer) and how the existing public information is
> managed and by whom to introduce some changes.****
>
> ** **
>
> I think all these points are also of my responsibility as WP leader
> because we spend too much time to write several times the same content in
> different ways, we are late for all deliverables and we create lots of
> noise around technical tasks and middleware we have to deliver. We will
> have to explain all these points to the Commission in 2 months so we have
> to identify solutions and be able to improve our project management to
> avoid any crisis with the Commission.****
>
> I’m opened for any suggestions but my first proposals are the following:**
> **
>
> **·         **Organize WP2 meetings to define ToC and guidelines for
> technical deliverables****
>
> **·         **Provide a GANTT for all further deliverables****
>
> **·         **Use mainly word document to be able to track easily all
> changes and for private deliverables****
>
> **·         **Based on the ToC allow responsibilities to editor and main
> contributors****
>
> ** **
>
> Best regards.****< /p>
>
> *Thierry Nagellen* ****
>
> *Program Manager Future Internet*
> *Orange Labs Networks & Carriers*
> 905 rue Albert Einstein
> 06921 Sophia Antipolis Cedex
> +33 492 94 52 84
> +33 679 85 08 44****
>
> *New email address: *thierry.nagellen at orange.com ****
>
> ** **
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Fiware-wpl mailing list
> Fiware-wpl at lists.fi-ware.eu
> http://lists.fi-ware.eu/listinfo/fiware-wpl
>
>


-- 
Stefano De Panfilis
Chief Innovation Officer
Engineering Ingegneria Informatica S.p.A.
via Riccardo Morandi 32
00148 Roma
Italy

tel (direct): +39-068307-4295
tel (secr.): +39-068307-4513
fax: +39-068307-4200
cell: +39-335-7542-567
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.fiware.org/private/fiware-pcc/attachments/20120504/ccf73a1c/attachment.html>