[Fiware-wpa] [Fiware-wpl] Packages template

[Heller, Markus]

Hi Stefano, all,

Thank you for your answer. Afterall, Stefano, this does not need to rely fully on your desk alone only because you took over the task to distribute the templates...

I enclose my comments:

> having said that i suggest for the documentation page:
- links to the package installation manual
- links to the documentation pages of the geis composing the package
- example on the use/demo of the package (indeed if there is a package is becouse there is a need for it, so more possible use of it as such)

OK, from me. What about the other's opinions?

I suggest strongly to create templates WORD documents because would be easier for all to handle "just-fill-in-mode". It can be dead-simple but at least we are sort of homogeneous in layout / content then) - like we do for the other official documents. This would support that we should make a homogenous appearance to our readers. Can you distribute them?


> for what concern the pubblication i'd stay with the oevral approach, i.e. me governing the publication process as it is now for the geis.

Basically Ok, but as we do for all "internal deliverables", we shall have a fixed deadline for until when the publication process is completed successfully and results being public, proposal: one month after the M36 that is M37.
As with all other deliverables, the leaving partners cannot  follow until long after M36, so all their contributions must be reviewed "enough" and rolled out if possible very early after they left - for fairness reasons as you can understand.

Which limit would be ok for you - meaning the deadline after M36 when all M36-eaving partners have their results really online/public. If improvements need to be made, the review/improvement cycle is only 1 iteration plus the following escalation management by Juanjo as project coordinator within a gioven time limit. We are currently writing this internal deliverable process into the DOW amendment 6 (Miguel and I are finalizing on word level). We can share this as an example - but I guess my point is rather clear.

Proposal: If needed, you must be supported by someone else for performing the reviews for M36 leaving partners then.

What would be your and the other WPL/WPA opinion?


> for you guys leaving the project on 30 april, i'd say deadline for submission to me 15 april.

>From my side OK, what do the other chapters say?


Best Wishes
Markus



From: stefano de panfilis [mailto:stefano.depanfilis at eng.it]
Sent: Montag, 31. März 2014 14:22
To: Heller, Markus
Cc: fiware-wpl at lists.fi-ware.eu; fiware-wpa at lists.fi-ware.eu
Subject: Re: [Fiware-wpl] Packages template

dear markus and all,

in general i'm not happy in repeting information in different pages as redoundancy, often not well controlloed, is cause of measleadings.

having said that i suggest for the documentation page:
- links to the package installation manual
- links to the documentation pages of the geis composing the package
- example on the use/demo of the package (indeed if there is a package is becouse there is a need for it, so more possible use of it as such)

for what concern the pubblication i'd stay with the oevral approach, i.e. me governing the publication process as it is now for the geis.


ciao,
stefano




2014-03-31 11:36 GMT+02:00 Heller, Markus <markus.heller at sap.com<mailto:markus.heller at sap.com>>:
Hi Stefano, all,

thanks for sending the template so far:
1.1                      Documentation Page: Same as per the Generic Enablers
So we can put doc on this tab/entry then, ok.



@ALL: My question goes not only to Stefano, but ALL of us:


What exactly do we want to provide/require as docu on document level for each package?

-          For example, only a "flyer" pointing to manuals etc of the GE's vs. a full own package-specific docu package (own installation manual, own user/prog, own ...)

-          Can we prescribe this in a bullet list what is needed to prepare and in which formats each ? Who does it, if yes?

-          Do they get own review processes or not? What would be a deadline schedule, if any?

Maybe we have decided such already?

Best wishes
Markus



From: fiware-wpl-bounces at lists.fi-ware.org<mailto:fiware-wpl-bounces at lists.fi-ware.org> [mailto:fiware-wpl-bounces at lists.fi-ware.org<mailto:fiware-wpl-bounces at lists.fi-ware.org>] On Behalf Of stefano de panfilis
Sent: Montag, 31. März 2014 08:57
To: 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>
Subject: [Fiware-wpl] Packages template

dear all,

please find attached the Packages template for the today discussion.
Unfortunately i cannot attend, Davide will represent Engineering.

ciao,
stefano

--
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:%2B39-068307-4295>
tel (secr.): +39-068307-4513<tel:%2B39-068307-4513>
fax: +39-068307-4200<tel:%2B39-068307-4200>
cell: +39-335-7542-567<tel:%2B39-335-7542-567>
skype: depa01




--
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
skype: depa01

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.fiware.org/private/fiware-wpa/attachments/20140331/e33a315b/attachment.html>