[Fiware-wpa] [Fiware-wpl] D.10.5.2b validation analysis and report final version (submission postponed to monday)

[Sandfuchs, Thorsten]

Very valuable input - thanks!

Will be part of the final deliverable.

Best,
                                                               /Thorsten

From: thierry.nagellen at orange.com [mailto:thierry.nagellen at orange.com]
Sent: Dienstag, 19. November 2013 09:58
To: Sandfuchs, Thorsten; Juanjo Hierro; stefano de panfilis
Cc: fiware-wpl at lists.fi-ware.eu; fiware-wpa at lists.fi-ware.eu
Subject: RE: [Fiware-wpl] D.10.5.2b validation analysis and report final version (submission postponed to monday)

Based on mailing lists concerns I'm not sure that everyone receive this email I sent yesterday. Apologize if you receive it twice.

BR
Thierry
--------------------------
Dear all,

I've added some comments very quickly regarding main inhibitors. Please take time to read them and improve them. This is not a chapter view but a more general approach explaining how we did our best to improve the relationships with UC projects.
https://forge.fi-ware.eu/plugins/mediawiki/wiki/testbed/index.php/FI-WARE_level_analysis#Main_inhibitors_identified_by_the_use_case_projects

BR
Thierry


De : fiware-wpl-bounces at lists.fi-ware.eu<mailto:fiware-wpl-bounces at lists.fi-ware.eu> [mailto:fiware-wpl-bounces at lists.fi-ware.eu] De la part de Sandfuchs, Thorsten
Envoyé : lundi 18 novembre 2013 08:42
À : Juanjo Hierro; stefano de panfilis
Cc : fiware-wpl at lists.fi-ware.eu<mailto:fiware-wpl at lists.fi-ware.eu>; fiware-wpa at lists.fi-ware.eu<mailto:fiware-wpa at lists.fi-ware.eu>
Objet : Re: [Fiware-wpl] D.10.5.2b validation analysis and report final version (submission postponed to monday)

Dear colleagues,
as I was not involved in the interaction with the EC to postpone this deliverable, I honestly can't judge if this can be postponed again. I would assume as it in general is not more "major" than other deliverables, it might be able to wait another day... but in the end this decision has to come from the management level & the people interacting with timing of deliverables towards the EC.

Since the last version (with or without "yellow boxes") there have been no major changes concerning editorial - OUTSMART as a chapter emerged and some sentences were rephrased. The final text and the diff is traceable in the wiki - the wiki is the single source of truth.
https://forge.fi-ware.eu/plugins/mediawiki/wiki/testbed/index.php?title=D.10.5.2b.Report_on_Validation_process_including_Validation_with_Use_Case_projects_front_page (links via "Structure"-section).
I didn't check the front page again, there might be errors - other errors (editorial or formal) I as well might be overlooking them as I read the text already a number of times - please mark them or comment them and I can fix them.

My proposal: wait for your review, integrate all changes and then submit. But again: I was not involved in the EC communication, so I can't judge the "urgency" of the deliverable really.

Concerning needed input: although "possible" and as you outlined, the FI-WARE level analysis was only edited and commented very little by anybody. In the end I even deleted the chapter "Comments by FI-WARE management" because there was actually zero content.
Now it "looks" as no sections has been planned, but as a reviewer I would immediately ask the question (especially after the section about the identified "main-inhibitors") if all of them were duly addressed by the consortium. Just ending the section there without any comment (as currently) is a bit harsh and we will have to comment on this on the review. If we already would know that all of the inhibitors were taking care of, why not write this and - at least for some - give proper examples of reactions of the UC projects. Unfortunately I can't provide this text - therefore I would kindly ask for contributions by anybody. If you input here - please make a introduce a separate section "Comments by FI-WARE management/leadership"  or something similar. Section in question: https://forge.fi-ware.eu/plugins/mediawiki/wiki/testbed/index.php/FI-WARE_level_analysis#Results_from_.22validation_context.22_dimension_questions

As always: you can work on wiki/doc (but please use TRACK CHANGES) or any other format and I will integrate this in the final wiki-based deliverable if needed.

Best regards,
                                                                              /Thorsten

From: Juanjo Hierro [mailto:jhierro at tid.es]
Sent: Montag, 18. November 2013 07:43
To: Sandfuchs, Thorsten; stefano de panfilis; fiware-testbed at lists.fi-ware.eu<mailto:fiware-testbed at lists.fi-ware.eu>
Cc: fiware-wpa at lists.fi-ware.eu<mailto:fiware-wpa at lists.fi-ware.eu>; fiware-wpl at lists.fi-ware.eu<mailto:fiware-wpl at lists.fi-ware.eu>
Subject: Re: D.10.5.2b validation analysis and report final version (submission postponed to monday)

Dear Thorsten,

  Thanks for your

  I have planed to review this deliverable before tomorrow, but if you want to deliver it today by all means, I won't object.   After all, I quickly checked the yellow boxes where you asked for input and I understood they were not just for me but for all WPLs and WPAs (referred collectively as management since indeed architecture chapter WPs are managed through the direct involvement of WPLs and WPAs).   Indeed, while I can provide comments in most of the cases, they shouldn't be so much different from those that can be provided by the WPLs/WPAs because most of the comments by UC projects, or data extracted from the questionnaires they have filled, go into details about usage of the GEis linked to the several chapters.

  I can carry out, though, a final review before tomorrow as I have just said.   As you wish.   But let me know so that I don't work in vain.  If there is any particular section where my concrete input would relevant, please let me know.

  BTW, I found a couple of editorial issues when I quickly perform a first reading of the contents of the version you distributed last week ... have you fixed those in this version ?   If you don't recall having fixed any editorial ... then I would suggest to carefully review the writing ...

  Best regards,

-- Juanjo

-------------

Product Development and Innovation (PDI) - Telefonica Digital

website: www.tid.es<http://www.tid.es>

email: jhierro at tid.es<mailto: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 15/11/13 16:58, Sandfuchs, Thorsten wrote:
Dear colleagues,
as juanjo seems to be busy and not in spain, there seems to be the weekend left for last fixes. If you can find any problems in the attached version of the deliverable, please let me know. Please use TRACK CHANGES if you change something in the file.

This version is still not released to the final wiki (accessible to all use case projects and EC) - so it is NOT the real final one, but if no changes are there in the text any more, I would release it.
I now deleted every "yellow" box in this version, still I would presume that the reviewers would find that FI-ware management did not comment a lot on the "findings" we unearthed, but that most probably will be the risk that we will face here.
I as well compiled a possible "executive summary".

Please carefully re-read the deliverable and I will do the move to the review-wiki on Monday morning, submission then on Monday EOB the latest.

Thanks for everybodies dedication and support in this topic!

Best,
                                                               /Thorsten

From: Sandfuchs, Thorsten
Sent: Mittwoch, 13. November 2013 19:47
To: stefano de panfilis; fiware-testbed at lists.fi-ware.eu<mailto:fiware-testbed at lists.fi-ware.eu>; 'Juanjo Hierro'
Cc: fiware-wpa at lists.fi-ware.eu<mailto:fiware-wpa at lists.fi-ware.eu>; fiware-wpl at lists.fi-ware.eu<mailto:fiware-wpl at lists.fi-ware.eu>
Subject: D.10.5.2b validation analysis and report ready for review within the next business day

Dear colleagues,
please find the current version of the D.10.5.2b deliverable for your consideration and review (you have one business day).

The latest changes I introduced are yet to be dully synced with the wiki, but this I will do tomorrow prior to final compilation. Of the deliverable on Friday.

Please provide your feedback, comments or direct changes (please use the track-changes functionality!!) in the word version directly and send it back to me.

What is open?

-          Especially for FI-WARE project management some more verbose information is highly needed e.g. in chapter FI-WARE level analysis (chapter 3.3). What did we draw out of the validation in this respect and how do we address the identified challenges? What was perceived good by fi-ware?

-          OUTSMART use case analysis is still missing

-          I will add some further and more details on the chapter 11 "validation methodology"

-          Review by all of the interested parties

Additionally we need a fresh minded review of the deliverable and judgment whether we present the FI-WARE project "good enough" and actually to the high level, that we actually reached so far.

Please take this seriously as I would imagine that this report might be considered for the next review as well in relation to GO or NO-GO decisions of your Generic Enablers!

To ease up readability you might consider activating the "final markup"-view in word or, prior to the introduction of new changes, just accept all pending changes that the team did before.

Thanks for any support & best regards,

                                               /Thorsten

--

Thorsten Sandfuchs

SAP AG | Vincenz-Priessnitz-Strasse 1 | D-76131 Karlsruhe, Germany | www.sap.com<http://www.sap.com/>


Pflichtangaben/Mandatory Disclosure Statements: http://www.sap.com/company/legal/impressum.epx

Diese E-Mail kann Betriebs- oder Geschäftsgeheimnisse oder sonstige vertrauliche Informationen enthalten. Sollten Sie diese E-Mail irrtümlich erhalten haben, ist Ihnen eine Kenntnisnahme des Inhalts, eine Vervielfältigung oder Weitergabe der E-Mail ausdrücklich untersagt. Bitte benachrichtigen Sie uns und vernichten Sie die empfangene E-Mail. Vielen Dank.

This e-mail may contain trade secrets or privileged, undisclosed, or otherwise confidential information. If you have received this e-mail in error, you are hereby notified that any review, copying, or distribution of it is strictly prohibited. Please inform us immediately and destroy the original transmittal. Thank you for your cooperation.

Please consider the environment before printing this mail!




________________________________

Este mensaje se dirige exclusivamente a su destinatario. Puede consultar nuestra política de envío y recepción de correo electrónico en el enlace situado más 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

_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________



Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc

pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu ce message par erreur, veuillez le signaler

a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration,

Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme ou falsifie. Merci.



This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged information that may be protected by law;

they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation.

If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete this message and its attachments.

As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have been modified, changed or falsified.

Thank you.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.fiware.org/private/fiware-wpa/attachments/20131119/3f499307/attachment.html>