From jhierro at tid.es Fri Jul 1 06:24:11 2011 From: jhierro at tid.es (Juanjo Hierro) Date: Fri, 01 Jul 2011 06:24:11 +0200 Subject: [Fiware-wpl] IMPORTANT Fwd: RE: FI-WARE: CVs of suggested reviewers Message-ID: <4E0D4BEB.9000709@tid.es> Dear all, As you will see reading the attached emails (in reverse order), I mentioned to the EC that several of the partners had some concerns with Mrs Li being a reviewer for our project. I didn't say that we wanted definitively to object about her but not decide yet about her candidature (reviewers can be added later on, as explained by Arian). I also mentioned that if they need to start with a minimum of three reviewers, we would propose Mike Fisher (BT) as candidate. Several of you had proposed Mike and indeed I believe he would be an excellent reviewer. The obvious reaction was that they asked what are the concerns about Mrs Li that we have. I would kindly ask those that provided me with that feedback to send me some rationale about their concerns about Mrs Li so that I can reply to the EC. Of course, those others that believe it is recommendable to go for another reviewed are also welcome to send me their feedback. Please note that selection of reviewers is a very crucial point. We should take it very seriously because it will influence very much some aspects of the project. Regarding good reviewers candidates, don't hesitate to send me any proposal if you haven't already do so. Best regards, -- Juanjo -------- Original Message -------- Subject: RE: FI-WARE: CVs of suggested reviewers Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2011 14:54:26 +0200 From: Annalisa.Bogliolo at ec.europa.eu To: JUAN JOSE HIERRO SUREDA CC: Arian.ZWEGERS at ec.europa.eu , JOSE JIMENEZ DELGADO Dear Juanjo, w-could you please explain me better which are the "concerns" about Mrs Li? As far as I know, she is knowledgeable and experienced in the Future of Internet themes, even if not from a strictly technical point of view, which is useful in a review. Mike Fisher is an excellent reviewer as well, but he's profile is quite different from the one of Mrs Li and thus it is difficult to see how he could replace her. In my opinion he could eventually complement the team, even though I would wait for Arian to be back before committing. In the meanwhile, could you please tell me about the concerns, as if they are serious and based on facts then we will have to examine them more closely. Best regards Annalisa ________________________________ From: Juanjo Hierro [mailto:jhierro at tid.es] Sent: Tuesday, June 28, 2011 6:34 AM To: BOGLIOLO Annalisa (INFSO) Cc: ZWEGERS Arian (INFSO); Jose Jimenez; jhierro >> "Juan J. Hierro" Subject: Re: FI-WARE: CVs of suggested reviewers Hi Annalisa, Some partners have expressed concerns regarding selection of Mrs Man-Sze Li as reviewer. Several partners have also proposed Mike Fisher (who I guess you know well) as reviewer. I would consider him a good choice myself. Definitively, he combines an industrial and research perspective and good knowledge of some of the topics covered in FI-WARE. He's also familiar with EU FP projects and is also playing a relevant role at ETSI. He may be an alternative to Man-Sze Li if you have to choose three names at this point. You mentioned that the review team as suggested by Arian can be complemented later on. We can take advantage of that to finally determine if Mrs Man-Sze Li is finally included. Best regards, -- Juanjo On 27/06/11 14:44, Annalisa.Bogliolo at ec.europa.eu wrote: Dear Juanjo I am afraid I have problems to give you more days as I need to close this dossier now as I am going on holiday in a very few days. You wrote me the same one month ago, and now I do not have time any longer to see who it is that you may propose, to contact them, to check if they can be reviewers etc etc. Please note that the review team as suggested by Arian can be complemented later on. So unless you let me know if there is a serious impediment for any of the three proposed reviewers by tonight, tomorrow I have to prepare the contracts, so that they can start reading the deliverables as soon as they are ready and the first is due in four days. I'm sure you do understand the urgency. Best regards Annalisa ________________________________ From: Juanjo Hierro [mailto:jhierro at tid.es] Sent: Monday, June 27, 2011 1:53 PM To: BOGLIOLO Annalisa (INFSO) Cc: JOSE JIMENEZ DELGADO; TAGLIANI Federica (INFSO); ZWEGERS Arian (INFSO); jhierro >> "Juan J. Hierro" Subject: Re: FI-WARE: CVs of suggested reviewers I would kindly ask you to give us a few more days. We are currently hoding some discussion on alternative candidates. If we finally reach an agreement about those alternatives candidates, we would like to provide their names for your consideration. Best regards, -- Juanjo On 23/06/11 15:01, Annalisa.Bogliolo at ec.europa.eu wrote: Dear Juanjo and Jose I have not heard anything after this mail about the reviewers. I would like to close this chapter before the end of next week as I am going on holiday. If I do not have concrete input by tomorrow (Brussels) lunch time, I will simply confirm Arian's proposal. Best regards Annalisa ________________________________ From: Juanjo Hierro [mailto:jhierro at tid.es] Sent: Thursday, May 26, 2011 6:02 PM To: ZWEGERS Arian (INFSO) Cc: JOSE JIMENEZ DELGADO; BOGLIOLO Annalisa (INFSO); TAGLIANI Federica (INFSO); jhierro >> "Juan J. Hierro" Subject: Re: FI-WARE: CVs of suggested reviewers Dear Arian, Annaliza and Federica, Please don't close the reviewers selection first. On one hand, we would like to analyze the candidates you propose carefully. On the other hand, we may come with some candidates you may also agree could be better (not yet identified, but is a point I have asked other partners to think about). We believe that selection of the right reviewers in this project is crucial. Let's keep in touch on the matter. Of course, we should be able to close a decision soon, preferably before end of June. Best regards, -- Juanjo On 23/05/11 21:46, Arian.ZWEGERS at ec.europa.eu wrote: Dear Jose, Juanjo, As discussed in Budapest, please find enclosed for your approval the CVs of 3 experts that I would like to suggest as FI-WARE reviewers. As mentioned, I would like to come to a way-of-working based on fast feedback / suggestion cycles. This will be largely realised using remote reviews, possibly complemented by phone conferences with some key FI-WARE people, if deemed useful or necessary. In case of remote reviews, feedback will be rather informal. The main (only?) point of attention for the reviewers will be industrial relevance of the project outcomes. I might want to suggest a fourth name with expertise in IoT and software development in a later stage. Best regards, Arian. PS. During my absence, starting now, please send emails to me with Annalisa and Federica in cc. <> <> <> <> ________________________________ 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 ________________________________ 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: jhierro.vcf Type: text/x-vcard Size: 429 bytes Desc: not available URL: From jhierro at tid.es Tue Jul 5 10:52:46 2011 From: jhierro at tid.es (Juanjo Hierro) Date: Tue, 05 Jul 2011 10:52:46 +0200 Subject: [Fiware-wpl] Update on status of integrated draft Message-ID: <4E12D0DE.8020806@tid.es> Hi all, This is the status regarding revision/integration of the FI-WARE High-level Description Deliverable * The revision of the Cloud chapter is considered finished since the WPL (Alex) considered he could accept all the changes in that the last version I uploaded and is currently available on the server * My revision of the I2ND chapter already finished (pending of final review by the editors, Pier and Hans) * I'm currently closing the revision of the IoT chapter. After several rounds with the editors, I believe it's pretty close to final. I plan to finish my final review about 13:00 CET and then it would be at the hands of the editors (Thierry and Lorant) * I have reviewed the Apps/Services Ecosystem and Delivery chapter and now it is at the hands of the editors (Andreas). Once they return it to me, I may carry out a last review but do not expect to have major additional comments, mostly editorial. * We are still integrating the pieces of the Data/Context Management chapter but I feel positive because I have closely followed the progress of these different pieces so far. I expect to be able to close a review by 17:00 * I still have to review the Security chapter but do not expect to find many issues. Based on this, I feel very positive that we will be able to deliver a draft by today. Best regards, -- Juanjo ________________________________ 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: jhierro.vcf Type: text/x-vcard Size: 429 bytes Desc: not available URL: From jhierro at tid.es Tue Jul 5 19:50:40 2011 From: jhierro at tid.es (Juanjo Hierro) Date: Tue, 05 Jul 2011 19:50:40 +0200 Subject: [Fiware-wpl] Status on revision/integrated of the FI-WARE High-level Description Draft Message-ID: <4E134EF0.5020308@tid.es> Folks, Update on status. Regarding revision: * Apps/Services Ecosystem and Delivery Framework: done * Cloud Hosting: done (all changes in the version currently on the serve can be considered accepted) * I2ND: done (agreement reached on the last two remaining comments) * IoT Service Enablement: done (all changes in the version currently on the serve can be considered accepted) * Security: in progress * Data/Context Management: in progress (though this should take short time for obvious reasons) I hope that I will be able to start putting all the pieces together in a single document starting about 21:30 - 22:00. I will first produce a clean formatted version of each chapter and upload them to the server. Then copying each after the other should work (although MS Word is an bottomless pit of surprises :-) Official delivery to UC projects earlier than 08:00am tomorrow. Best regards, -- Juanjo ________________________________ 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: jhierro.vcf Type: text/x-vcard Size: 429 bytes Desc: not available URL: From jhierro at tid.es Wed Jul 6 09:46:30 2011 From: jhierro at tid.es (Juanjo Hierro) Date: Wed, 06 Jul 2011 09:46:30 +0200 Subject: [Fiware-wpl] Status of FI-WARE High-level Description Deliverable Message-ID: <4E1412D6.4030602@tid.es> Hi all, Just an update on this. I managed to generate an integrated draft with all the revised chapters. I would uploaded it, as well as each of the individual chapter files to the FusionForge ... but suddenly it has fallen :-) We are fixing this and I hope FusionForge will be soon up and running. I'm not sending the document into an attachment because the .pdf file is more than 5 Mb and the .doc is more than 10 Mb ... So we'll have to wait until I can upload it and pass you the link. At this point, I would kindly ask you to consider that ALL chapters are in pending status. This is mainly because I made a lot of a adjustments in the formats and I would like that you continue working from this newly formatted versions. Besides, one of the editorial changes that I made was to transform each Architecture chapter into an actual chapter within the document. This decision implied that all section headers go a level higher. However, for a document 227 pages long (yes, believe me :-) it didn't make so much sense to keep 90% of its contents in just one single page. Let me take this opportunity to give you my congratulations for the great job that WPLs and WP teams have done. Honestly speaking, I believe the produced material is of high quality, overall considering we have managed to produce such a comprehensive and complete picture in just two months !! One thought comes to my mind when I read the document (and hopefully when others will read it as well): If we managed to deliver a platform that implements all these functionalities and does this in an integrated manner, we would have something big which actually can make an impact. Something nobody has today on the Internet even Google. May not be "rocket science" but I tell you that we would be giving something rather powerful for Application Developers today. Something, as said before, nobody is giving them in such an integrated way. Please remember that this is our first integrated draft. Now, we should organize a number of peer reviews and have to continue working in everything that was pending as to be able to deliver a final official release by mid July. I'll send a plan this afternoon to all WPLs. Best regards, -- Juanjo 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 -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: jhierro.vcf Type: text/x-vcard Size: 429 bytes Desc: not available URL: From jhierro at tid.es Wed Jul 6 10:58:26 2011 From: jhierro at tid.es (Juanjo Hierro) Date: Wed, 06 Jul 2011 10:58:26 +0200 Subject: [Fiware-wpl] Fwd: DRAFT of FI-WARE High-level Description deliverable available Message-ID: <4E1423B2.2010102@tid.es> FYI, -- Juanjo -------- Original Message -------- Subject: DRAFT of FI-WARE High-level Description deliverable available Date: Wed, 06 Jul 2011 10:57:49 +0200 From: Juanjo Hierro To: ab at fi-ppp.eu Dear colleagues, I'm proud to announce the delivery of the integrated draft of the FI-WARE High-level Description document (product vision) You can download it from the following URL: https://forge.fi-ware.eu/docman/view.php/7/232/FI-WARE+High-Level+Description+integrated+draft+0.1+11-07-06.pdf Note that this is still a draft. We plan to deliver the first official release of this deliverable by mid July. However, you will notice that there is a lot of content already that would allow you to get a rather accurate idea of what we intend to deliver. Indeed, we will mainly devoted to perform some fine-tuning and cover some small gaps in order to produce the final deliverable from the current draft. We will have the opportunity to present the FI-WARE High-level Description during our f2f meeting next week in Madrid. It would be great if you can make a first reading of the document before the meeting and provide some early feedback. Of course, I understand it can only be very early feedback. I hope you have time for this first reading during the coming days. This document should not be disclosed outside the PPP program. Note that the first release (in no more than 15 days) will be available to the general public. Let me finish sharing with you that I rather believe that what we plan to deliver in FI-WARE may achieve a great impact. If we manage to deliver a platform that implements all the described functionalities and does this in such an integrated manner, we would be delivering something nobody offers today on the Internet (even Google). And it would we something rather powerful for Application Developers today. It's my honest opinion. Hope also yours after reading the document. Best regards, -- Juanjo ________________________________ 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: jhierro.vcf Type: text/x-vcard Size: 429 bytes Desc: not available URL: From jhierro at tid.es Wed Jul 6 10:59:32 2011 From: jhierro at tid.es (Juanjo Hierro) Date: Wed, 06 Jul 2011 10:59:32 +0200 Subject: [Fiware-wpl] Fwd: DRAFT of FI-WARE High-level Description deliverable available In-Reply-To: <4E1423B2.2010102@tid.es> References: <4E1423B2.2010102@tid.es> Message-ID: <4E1423F4.6040507@tid.es> In the coming minutes, I will make all the .docs per chapter and the integrated draft available on FusionForge. Just wait a couple of minutes. I'll let you know when they are available BR, -- Juanjo On 06/07/11 10:58, Juanjo Hierro wrote: FYI, -- Juanjo -------- Original Message -------- Subject: DRAFT of FI-WARE High-level Description deliverable available Date: Wed, 06 Jul 2011 10:57:49 +0200 From: Juanjo Hierro To: ab at fi-ppp.eu Dear colleagues, I'm proud to announce the delivery of the integrated draft of the FI-WARE High-level Description document (product vision) You can download it from the following URL: https://forge.fi-ware.eu/docman/view.php/7/232/FI-WARE+High-Level+Description+integrated+draft+0.1+11-07-06.pdf Note that this is still a draft. We plan to deliver the first official release of this deliverable by mid July. However, you will notice that there is a lot of content already that would allow you to get a rather accurate idea of what we intend to deliver. Indeed, we will mainly devoted to perform some fine-tuning and cover some small gaps in order to produce the final deliverable from the current draft. We will have the opportunity to present the FI-WARE High-level Description during our f2f meeting next week in Madrid. It would be great if you can make a first reading of the document before the meeting and provide some early feedback. Of course, I understand it can only be very early feedback. I hope you have time for this first reading during the coming days. This document should not be disclosed outside the PPP program. Note that the first release (in no more than 15 days) will be available to the general public. Let me finish sharing with you that I rather believe that what we plan to deliver in FI-WARE may achieve a great impact. If we manage to deliver a platform that implements all the described functionalities and does this in such an integrated manner, we would be delivering something nobody offers today on the Internet (even Google). And it would we something rather powerful for Application Developers today. It's my honest opinion. Hope also yours after reading the document. Best regards, -- Juanjo ________________________________ 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: jhierro.vcf Type: text/x-vcard Size: 429 bytes Desc: not available URL: From jhierro at tid.es Wed Jul 6 12:27:20 2011 From: jhierro at tid.es (Juanjo Hierro) Date: Wed, 06 Jul 2011 12:27:20 +0200 Subject: [Fiware-wpl] Contents of chapters available and planning until official deliverable Message-ID: <4E143888.6050309@tid.es> Dear colleagues, You will find the .doc files of each of your chapters in the usual placeholders. Now, the name associated to each of them adopts the following convention: "FI-WARE High-level Description - Chapter v." The integrated draft is available at: https://forge.fi-ware.eu/docman/view.php/7/235/FI-WARE+High-Level+Description+integrated+draft+0.1+11-07-06.doc But we should keep working with separated files per chapter. I first action I would kindly ask all of you to perform is to check that all your stuff is there and I didn't miss anything during the integration :-) If you find something missing, please let me know. Now, we should NOT relax and keep going to get the official release of the deliverable on time. This was announced for mid July ... what mid July means is up to us, but I would suggest making it available on July 19th. What I would suggest now is that we carry out a peer review of each chapter, involving members of a given WP in reviewing the contents of those chapter with whom more inter dependencies may exist. In parallel, each group should try to finish what couldn't make for this first draft. I know that the analysis of Security aspects, just to mention an example, is not closed for all the chapters. I will try to send a summary of what I see pending per chapter later today. In respect to peer reviews, here you have my suggestions for a first round. We would try to make another round before the deadline: Chapter Chief editors Contacts Suggested peer reviewer (team) Cloud Hosting IBM GLIKSON at il.ibm.com Interfaces to Networks & Devices Data/Context Management TID jhierro at tid.es IoT Services Enablement Apps/Services Ecosystem & Delivery SAP andreas.friesen at sap.com, torsten.leidig at sap.com Security IoT Services Enablement Orange & NSN Thierry.nagellen at orange-ftgroup.com, lorant.farkas at nsn.com Data/Context Management Interfaces to Networks & Devices TI &DT pierangelo.garino at telecomitalia.it, Hans.Einsiedler at telekom.de Cloud Hosting Security Thales pascal.bisson at thalesgroup.com, daniel.gidoin at thalesgroup.com Apps/Services Ecosystem & Delivery I would suggest that we define the following milestones linked to this first round unless I hear any objection: * July 11 EOB, reviewers to send their comments (I suggest word files with changes under control) * July 13 EOB, revision of comments by editors of each chapter and upload of new version by chief editors on FusionForge If you believe that there would be a better assignment for you, please also let me know and we'll try together to see if there is an alternative arrangement. Chief editors in the table above matches the WPLs and WPAs as you may already know. WPLs are entitled to contact the chief editor of the chapter his team has been assigned to review so that you can agree on how to proceed. We can keep the procedure of managing the editor token by playing with the states linked to documents in the docman system so that whenever one file is in "pending" state means somebody is editing it. Whenever one changes the state of a given document to "pending" it should announce it to the people involved. Anyway, you should always download the last version from FusionForge (or check that the version you have is downloadable) whenever you decide to start editing a document and change it to "pending". A good strategy in some cases is that you split the chapter in several files, so that you keep control of those pieces that you believe are unstable and leave the rest for review. If you have still pending points, this procedure won't be perfect so each editor should probably edit his version in parallel someone is reviewing it, then manage how to integrate the comments. But there is no much better ways to proceed unless you have a better idea. There are other things that we should start hard because we are behind the schedule. An important part has to do with starting to bring content to the website and blogs. It won't be that difficult now that we have quite a bit of content and nice stories to talk about :-) I'll send an email with a plan proposal on the matter either today or tomorrow. ONE FINAL WORD AND RATHER IMPORTANT: PLEASE respect the styles and procedures for editing describing at the front matter of the documents. Some of you have tried to respect them, and integration was rather easy. BUT I HAVE TO SAY THAT OTHERS HAVE NOT. And this creates a lot of burden. I can tell you that I have lost almost one hour with one of the chapters just fixing the formats while I have spent just 15 mins with the chapters from those who followed the rules. FOR THE NEXT ROUND, take it seriously, I will reject any file that contains prohibited styles or broken styles. I know that it's pretty easy just to copy&paste from another document you may have written before or apart of this project or a web page, but that action breaks everything and has unpredictable consequences in MS Word. It is also easier to create bullet lists or numbered lists using the buttons for doing so that MS Word offers to you at the upper tool bar, but that also has unpredictable consequences and means breaking an homogeneous style across the whole document (I will indeed try to find out how to prevent these buttons to appear :-) And that's all for this very long mail, I want to again thank you for all your efforts, good attitude and, overall, patience with my requests. Best regards, -- Juanjo ________________________________ 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: jhierro.vcf Type: text/x-vcard Size: 429 bytes Desc: not available URL: From jhierro at tid.es Fri Jul 8 07:59:37 2011 From: jhierro at tid.es (Juanjo Hierro) Date: Fri, 08 Jul 2011 07:59:37 +0200 Subject: [Fiware-wpl] Fwd: Description of entries in the FI-PPP backlog Message-ID: <4E169CC9.8080605@tid.es> Hi all, Please read this email carefully because it has to do with many of the things we have to in the coming months (Did you really thing you could relax after finishing our first deliverable? :-) Attached you are a message that I sent yesterday to members of the FI-PPP Architecture Board (AB). It elaborated on the fields we would like to define for entries in the FI-PPP AB backlog, part of which would be the FI-WARE product backlog. You may have heard about that before, when we talked about the "template" for FI-WARE product backlog entries. Definition of this "template" is quite relevant since we will have to comply with it when defining the features we want to develop in the assets we select for the reference implementation of the FI-WARE GEs: * functional enhancements we have decided to add to selected assets to materialize the Product Vision we have developed in the FI-WARE High-level Description deliverable * changes we need to incorporate to selected assets to deal with the integration with other GEs There is the intend to use Agilefant as the tool for managing the FI-PPP AB backlog, therefore the FI-WARE product backlog. An instance of the product, available for all projects in the FI-PPP, should be made available by the end of July. The WPL and WPA of a given Architecture Chapter in FI-WARE should be the owners of entries in the backlog that correspond to that chapter (you will see there is a chapter field and a GE id field in the template). * This means that you should work with the rest of your team in defining the entries in the FI-PPP AB backlog that you wish to plan for each and every GE in the chapter. Note that we had planned to have a first release of this by end of September and you should be able to drive this in parallel to discussion about what are going to be the final assets for each of the GEs we have identified and how we plan to integrate the selected assets (this indeed will help to identify specific entries in the backlog). Then we should be able to merge what we have produced together with UC project's input in order to generate a final set of entries in the FI-WARE product backlog (which would be part of the FI-PPP AB backlog) by the end of November. Note that there should be entries for ALL GEs in the chapter. There are some GEs for which no asset has been identified: descriptions of entries in the backlog will be input material for the Open Calls to be issued. * Besides, we may need to program some joint workshops with the UC projects in the August to November timeframe. This will be indeed needed to explain them better what we intend to do and help them to produce input that may be transformed into feature requests incorporated in the FI-WARE backlog. One issue that has already been identified is that UC projects will be able to generate entries in the FI-PPP AB backlog that will be very much related to use cases ("user stories" following the Agile terminology) so that they will be described in terms of what end users wish to have when dealing with applications. These users stories have to be mapped into features the UC projects have to implement in their application prototypes and features they need application development/execution platforms to support. We therefore have to collaborate with them, negotiating with them whether a platform feature will be tackled or not in FI-WARE (there is the concept of domain-specific common enablers that would complement FI-WARE GEs) and helping them to map user stories into a concrete feature request for concrete FI-WARE GEs, when applicable. On Monday and Tuesday next week (July 11-12) the FI-PPP AB will meet in Madrid and take a decision on the final template to be defined for the FI-PPP AB. During the meeting, we will also confirm whether the Agilefant tool will be finally used or not. We will also decide on procedures to follow for creation and distilling of backlog entries (e.g., transformation of use stories from UC projects into demanded features for FI-WARE GEs). I propose that we have a joint confcall (all WPLs and WPAs) to brief you on results from the FI-PPP AB meeting and plan next steps on the matter. In order to choose the time for this confcall, I have setup the following doodle. Please cast your vote asap so that everyone can pencil it on his agenda. http://www.doodle.com/ppva55ixndg3gwhq If you have any further questions or wish to provide some feedback prior to the FI-PPP AB meeting, please don't hesitate to do so. Thanks, -- Juanjo -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Description of entries in the FI-PPP backlog Date: Thu, 07 Jul 2011 16:30:48 +0200 From: Juanjo Hierro To: ab at fi-ppp.eu Hi, Despite a little bit late, here you are attached a first shot on fields that may be relevant for entries in the FI-PPP backlog. I developed this based on the different inputs received so far, included the last one from FINEST (there are many fields in common to it, although I have refined a bit some of them) Take a review it before the f2f meeting in Madrid. Of course, you are welcome to initiate a discussion about them or even ask for clarifications in advance to the meeting, using this mailing list. That certainly would be helpful and would mean saving time and focus on decisions there. One point that we have to take into account is the limitation of the tool we may finally adopt. As far as I understand, the number of fields to be defined for entries in a backlog is pre-defined in a product like Agilefant, which still seems to be a rather serious candidate to choose: CONCORD will update us on the matter but seems like we may end up being able to use it despite the bad news shared by CONCORD in our last (virtual) meeting. But we can always add an URL to a Wiki and/or tracking system where additional info may be provided and structured in the free-text description field supported in Agilefant. Last but not least, we have to seriously think about how far we want to go in providing a detailed description of entries in the backlog. As you all know, and we say in Spanish ... "the better is enemy of the good" :-) I'm happy to have entries that provide valuable info and are very easy to fill because they merely consist to introduce a word (MoSCoW priority, complexity, creation date, stakeholders, ...) but feel more worried about the kind of info we may need to provide in the field I have named as "Description". Best regards, -- Juanjo ________________________________ 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: Backlog entries description v0.1 11-07-07.xlsx Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.spreadsheetml.sheet Size: 40101 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: jhierro.vcf Type: text/x-vcard Size: 429 bytes Desc: not available URL: From jhierro at tid.es Sun Jul 10 15:45:28 2011 From: jhierro at tid.es (Juanjo Hierro) Date: Sun, 10 Jul 2011 15:45:28 +0200 Subject: [Fiware-wpl] Fwd: [FI-PPP AB] Invitation: ServiceWave 2011 FI PPP Session Message-ID: <4E19ACF8.4040002@tid.es> Hi all, I would like to call your attention about the attached message. I guess it would be worth to contribute with a paper on FI-WARE to the technical FI PPP session that has been planned in the ServiceWave 2011 event. It shouldn't be that difficult once we have produced the FI-WARE High-level Description deliverable. Please let me know what do you think. It seems like we have to respond by July 14, so that I would like to get your replies by email before that date. Then we may discuss how we can plan writing the paper during our confcall on July 14th (I remind you there was a doodle I setup to find out the best timeslot for the confcall in which we will brief you on results of our FI-PPP AB meeting) Best regards, -- Juanjo -------- Original Message -------- Subject: [FI-PPP AB] Invitation: ServiceWave 2011 FI PPP Session Date: Sat, 9 Jul 2011 20:05:31 +0200 From: Metzger, Andreas To: ab at fi-ppp.eu CC: clarissa.marquezan at paluno.uni-due.de Dear FI PPP colleagues, Based on the positive response of many of you, we are happy to announce that ServiceWave 2011 will feature a technical FI PPP session. On behalf of the ServiceWave 2011 General Chair, Klaus Pohl, I cordially invite you to present the first technical outcomes of your project during that session. In addition, we are happy to offer you to write a paper between 2-12 pages which will be published in the ServiceWave 2011 Springer LNCS proceedings (CRC deadline is August, 10). As you can see from the attached flyer, the FI PPP session is scheduled to take place on day 1 of the conference, following the FIA sessions in the morning and preceded by an opening keynote from the EC. After the FI PPP session, there will be the joint FIA/FIRE/ServiceWave demonstration evening, which last time attracted well over 200 participants. We look forward to your positive response and kindly ask you to please confirm your contribution by July, 14, such that we can start advertising. Thus, please also send us the tentative title of your presentation and let us know whether you would like to contribute a paper to the proceedings. Very best regards, Andreas PS: Please apologize multiple receptions of this e-mail. It has been resent, as it did not reach all AB members. -- Dr. Andreas Metzger Research group leader 'Software and Service Quality' Paluno (The Ruhr Institute for Software Technology) * University of Duisburg-Essen Gerlingstra?e 16 * 45127 Essen * Germany * callto:+49-201-183-4650 * fax:+49-201-183-4699 mailto:andreas.metzger at paluno.uni-due.de * http://www.paluno.eu * VAT-Nr. DE811272995 -- ________________________________ 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: ServiceWave2011_Flyer.pdf Type: application/octet-stream Size: 1599087 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: ATT00001..txt URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: jhierro.vcf Type: text/x-vcard Size: 429 bytes Desc: not available URL: From jhierro at tid.es Wed Jul 13 08:40:18 2011 From: jhierro at tid.es (Juanjo Hierro) Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2011 08:40:18 +0200 Subject: [Fiware-wpl] Confcall to report on the FI-PPP AB meeting Message-ID: <4E1D3DD2.1070806@tid.es> Dear all, Based on results of the poll and trying to find a combination where at least some representative of each of the Architecture chapters be present, we will have the confcall to brief on results of the FI-PPP AB meeting on Thursday, 15:30 CET. Dial-in details will be circulated later. Thanks, -- Juanjo 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 -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: jhierro.vcf Type: text/x-vcard Size: 429 bytes Desc: not available URL: From jhierro at tid.es Wed Jul 13 08:42:54 2011 From: jhierro at tid.es (Juanjo Hierro) Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2011 08:42:54 +0200 Subject: [Fiware-wpl] Confcall to report on the FI-PPP AB meeting (will also be used to follow-up status of the peer-review process by each chapter) In-Reply-To: <4E1D3DD2.1070806@tid.es> References: <4E1D3DD2.1070806@tid.es> Message-ID: <4E1D3E6E.6010405@tid.es> Hi, Just point out that we will take advantage of this confcall to perform an overall follow-up of the peer-review process of the different chapters of the FI-WARE High-level description document. BR, -- Juanjo On 13/07/11 08:40, Juanjo Hierro wrote: > Dear all, > > Based on results of the poll and trying to find a combination where > at least some representative of each of the Architecture chapters be > present, we will have the confcall to brief on results of the FI-PPP > AB meeting on Thursday, 15:30 CET. > > Dial-in details will be circulated later. > > Thanks, > > -- Juanjo 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 -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: jhierro.vcf Type: text/x-vcard Size: 429 bytes Desc: not available URL: From juan.bareno at atosresearch.eu Thu Jul 14 12:56:13 2011 From: juan.bareno at atosresearch.eu (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Juan_Bare=F1o_Guerenabarrena?=) Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2011 12:56:13 +0200 Subject: [Fiware-wpl] FW: [Fiware-exploitation] Summary of activities WP11 Message-ID: <06BEE166C7F75A47B257036739E29BF30281F5CE@INTMAIL02.es.int.atosorigin.com> Dear Colleagues As we miss most of you into the Exploitation mailing list, please I encourage all partners to appoint the right person in their organizations to be the contact person in WP11 and please subscribe to the following mailing list http://lists.fi-ware.eu/listinfo/fiware-exploitation , in order to follow-up the activities of this WP, as you can see in the mail below Partners involved in WP11 are (besides ATOS, which is the WP leader): * TID * SAP * IBM-IL * THALES * TI * FT * NSN-T * NSN-FI * DT * TRDF * EAB * ENG * ALU-I * ALU-D * SIEMENS * INTEL * NEC Thanks for your quick reaction. Br Juan From: fiware-exploitation-bounces at lists.fi-ware.eu [mailto:fiware-exploitation-bounces at lists.fi-ware.eu] On Behalf Of Juan Bare?o Guerenabarrena Sent: mi?rcoles, 13 de julio de 2011 15:10 To: fiware-exploitation at lists.fi-ware.eu Subject: [Fiware-exploitation] Summary of activities WP11 Dear Colleagues First of all sorry for the delay for this first communication but we had some internal issues in accessing the mailing lists. During this time our team has kick-started the activities in 3 tasks of WP11. We have uploaded in the forge the first draft of the Table of Contents for the following exploitation deliverables: ? D11.1 Market and competition analysis . Download the document here ? D11.2 Exploitation Plan, Including IPR management. Download the document here ? D11.3 Market and Policy Regulation Awareness report. Download the document here ? D11.4 Standardization Plan- we are trying to reach someone for NEC, leader of this task We would like to obtain your comments/suggestions/inputs by the end of month. Always in the forge, we have uploaded two templates to collect information from individual partners. Every partners is kindly asked to fill these templates where relevant following the instructions you will find in the templates. ? IPR template with the main goal of collecting IPR data of FI-WARE components. Download the document here ? Individual Exploitation Plan template to collect partner exploitation strategy information & plans. Download the document here Best Regards Juan Bare?o AtoS Research & Innovation Albarrac?n 25 28037 Madrid Spain T +34 912148859 juan.bareno at atos.net www.atos.net www.atosresearch.eu ------------------------------------------------------------------ This e-mail and the documents attached are confidential and intended solely for the addressee; it may also be privileged. If you receive this e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately and destroy it. As its integrity cannot be secured on the Internet, the Atos group liability cannot be triggered for the message content. Although the sender endeavours to maintain a computer virus-free network, the sender does not warrant that this transmission is virus-free and will not be liable for any damages resulting from any virus transmitted. Este mensaje y los ficheros adjuntos pueden contener informacion confidencial destinada solamente a la(s) persona(s) mencionadas anteriormente pueden estar protegidos por secreto profesional. Si usted recibe este correo electronico por error, gracias por informar inmediatamente al remitente y destruir el mensaje. Al no estar asegurada la integridad de este mensaje sobre la red, Atos no se hace responsable por su contenido. Su contenido no constituye ningun compromiso para el grupo Atos, salvo ratificacion escrita por ambas partes. Aunque se esfuerza al maximo por mantener su red libre de virus, el emisor no puede garantizar nada al respecto y no sera responsable de cualesquiera danos que puedan resultar de una transmision de virus. ------------------------------------------------------------------ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.gif Type: image/gif Size: 78 bytes Desc: image001.gif URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image002.gif Type: image/gif Size: 816 bytes Desc: image002.gif URL: -------------- next part -------------- An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: ATT1583382.txt URL: From jhierro at tid.es Thu Jul 14 14:46:25 2011 From: jhierro at tid.es (Juanjo Hierro) Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2011 14:46:25 +0200 Subject: [Fiware-wpl] Bridge and webex for the confcall scheduled today at 15:30 Message-ID: <4E1EE521.6030607@tid.es> Hi all, We will use a powwownow bridge for our telco this afternoon. Dial-in phone numbers can be found in the enclosed .pdf. PIN for the bridge: 050662 Besides, following you can find the details for connecting via Webex in case we need it for sharing documents. Best regards, -- Juanjo -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Meeting invitation: FI-PPP AB briefing to WPs Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2011 09:20:11 +0200 From: Gestor i-Reunion webex9100 Reply-To: Webex9100 at tid.es To: JUAN JOSE HIERRO SUREDA Hello , Gestor i-Reunion webex9100 invites you to attend this online meeting. Topic: FI-PPP AB briefing to WPs Date: Thursday, July 14, 2011 Time: 3:30 pm, Europe Summer Time (Paris, GMT+02:00) Meeting Number: 965 060 456 Meeting Password: 1234abcD ------------------------------------------------------- To join the online meeting (Now from iPhones too!) ------------------------------------------------------- 1. Go to https://telefonica.webex.com/telefonica-en/j.php?ED=180877802&UID=1245694497&PW=NMjM4YTRlOGVj&RT=MiMyMw%3D%3D 2. Enter your name and email address. 3. Enter the meeting password: 1234abcD 4. Click "Join Now". To view in other time zones or languages, please click the link: https://telefonica.webex.com/telefonica-en/j.php?ED=180877802&UID=1245694497&PW=NMjM4YTRlOGVj&ORT=MiMyMw%3D%3D ------------------------------------------------------- For assistance ------------------------------------------------------- 1. Go to https://telefonica.webex.com/telefonica-en/mc 2. On the left navigation bar, click "Support". You can contact me at: Webex9100 at tid.es To add this meeting to your calendar program (for example Microsoft Outlook), click this link: https://telefonica.webex.com/telefonica-en/j.php?ED=180877802&UID=1245694497&ICS=MI&LD=1&RD=2&ST=1&SHA2=LHP0s7txt-k1OwhB8zFBrZ3BFaCP3Eomt166obPiohg=&RT=MiMyMw%3D%3D The playback of UCF (Universal Communications Format) rich media files requires appropriate players. To view this type of rich media files in the meeting, please check whether you have the players installed on your computer by going to https://telefonica.webex.com/telefonica-en/systemdiagnosis.php Sign up for a free trial of WebEx http://www.webex.com/go/mcemfreetrial http://www.webex.com IMPORTANT NOTICE: This WebEx service includes a feature that allows audio and any documents and other materials exchanged or viewed during the session to be recorded. By joining this session, you automatically consent to such recordings. If you do not consent to the recording, do not join the session. ________________________________ 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: Powwownow-dial-in-numbers.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 61516 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: jhierro.vcf Type: text/x-vcard Size: 429 bytes Desc: not available URL: From jhierro at tid.es Thu Jul 14 14:49:15 2011 From: jhierro at tid.es (Juanjo Hierro) Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2011 14:49:15 +0200 Subject: [Fiware-wpl] Template for entries in the FI-PPP backlog Message-ID: <4E1EE5CB.1040905@tid.es> Hi all, Complementing what I will share with you during the confcall later, please find enclosed the template for entries in the FI-PPP backlog that were agreed during the FI-PPP AB meeting. Another decision that was taken was that of using Agilefant for managing the backlogs. CONCORD is in charge of setting up the Agilefant infrastructure so that it should be ready in the coming days (July 19th was defined as the deadline but may be deployed earlier) Best regards, -- Juanjo 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 -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Backlog entries description v0 1 11-07-12.xls Type: application/vnd.ms-excel Size: 52224 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: jhierro.vcf Type: text/x-vcard Size: 429 bytes Desc: not available URL: From thierry.nagellen at orange-ftgroup.com Thu Jul 14 15:30:09 2011 From: thierry.nagellen at orange-ftgroup.com (thierry.nagellen at orange-ftgroup.com) Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2011 15:30:09 +0200 Subject: [Fiware-wpl] Confcall to report on the FI-PPP AB meeting (will also be used to follow-up status of the peer-review process by each chapter) In-Reply-To: <4E1D3E6E.6010405@tid.es> References: <4E1D3DD2.1070806@tid.es> <4E1D3E6E.6010405@tid.es> Message-ID: Hi all Here are some notes I took during the meeting, especially the questions from the UA projects following the presentation of the different technical chapters. BR Thierry -----Message d'origine----- De?: fiware-wpl-bounces at lists.fi-ware.eu [mailto:fiware-wpl-bounces at lists.fi-ware.eu] De la part de Juanjo Hierro Envoy??: mercredi 13 juillet 2011 08:43 ??: fiware-wpl at lists.fi-ware.eu; fiware-wpa at lists.fi-ware.eu Objet?: Re: [Fiware-wpl] Confcall to report on the FI-PPP AB meeting (will also be used to follow-up status of the peer-review process by each chapter) Hi, Just point out that we will take advantage of this confcall to perform an overall follow-up of the peer-review process of the different chapters of the FI-WARE High-level description document. BR, -- Juanjo On 13/07/11 08:40, Juanjo Hierro wrote: > Dear all, > > Based on results of the poll and trying to find a combination where > at least some representative of each of the Architecture chapters be > present, we will have the confcall to brief on results of the FI-PPP > AB meeting on Thursday, 15:30 CET. > > Dial-in details will be circulated later. > > Thanks, > > -- Juanjo 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 -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Minutes-Madrid AB-11072011.docx Type: application/octet-stream Size: 18981 bytes Desc: Minutes-Madrid AB-11072011.docx URL: From lorant.farkas at nsn.com Thu Jul 14 17:42:32 2011 From: lorant.farkas at nsn.com (Farkas, Lorant (NSN - HU/Budapest)) Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2011 18:42:32 +0300 Subject: [Fiware-wpl] [WPA/WPL meeting] randomly taken notes, 14.07.2011 Message-ID: <93D28BDF64839C468B848D14227151A202035064@FIESEXC014.nsn-intra.net> Juanjo, Alex, Pier Garino, Lorant, Andreas, Torsten, Hans, Juan Bareno/ATOS Juanjo: -Summary from the AB meeting: 2 parts in the meeting. First - HLD presentations, all the chapters, split into 2 days. It took 5 hours the first day, 1 hour the second day. Second part: how to work with the notion of backlog. Important to share with WPL/WPA-s - we need to rollout in FI-WARE. Aspects related to the template were addressed for the backlog and about how we would run the process, what tools would be put in place and so on. -Number of notes with remarks, Thierry sent additional notes that we can review. Starting with Juanjo's. -In general terms the presentation was welcome. One of the positive comments was that people now understand better what we have offered to deliver and that concept of GE has become more clear to them because at the beginning this concept was very abstract, but now they really understand better what we mean by GE. -In general they are eager to know more details and understand better what we plan to deliver for each of the GE that we identified. We provided more details, because of that they want to know even more to really understand precisely what we are going to deliver, what interfaces we plan to support, to really evaluate how they could use the services we provide, what will be the impact of using our GE-s in their design. Juanjo explained that it needs to be refined over time but we cannot precise right now in all respects. But this is a positive thing that they want to know what interfaces we want to support. -One comment for the official delivery scheduled next week is that they believe that if we want to support a concrete standard interface/spec, we should clearly state that. There are a couple of examples: OMA in the pub/sub enabler - point was that this was not clearly stated. We have to review in general when we want to follow a given standard, if not already explicitly stated in the current description. -Additional general comment is that they feel like the document lookes like it has been developed by separate teams - missing cross references, terms that should be used more consistently across the document - sometimes similar terms in different chapters and not with the same meaning. Juanjo explained we are solving this right now. -Additional comment was that although we are complete in scope, there might be some gaps that may correspond to the needs they have - how are those gaps covered. Led to a discussion how to open the budget of the open calls. Juanjo told them that part of the budget will be used to cover gaps that were already identified (not all GE-s are enablers for which there is an asset), but there might be other gaps derived from the inputs from them. We explained that it is important that they provide the necessary input to identify those gaps. -As a complement to these comments all of them made a request to set up some tools to communicate with different chapter teams to ask questions and clarifications about docs, Juanjo wanted to discuss this because we need to agree on what we provide them as means for allowing them to ask and exchange information and answer questions they may have on the GE-s. -Juanjo takes a look at the minutes of Thierry, no generic points were mentioned there. Discussion on why OMA was chosen instead of other standard, Juanjo explained that we don't want to support multiple pub/sub mechanisms in the platform, we have to make our choices. Number of questions about particular GE-s - general comment to contact the teams to ask clarifications. For ASE there was discussion on what we mean by SLA management, this was clarified and explained that it has to do with the availability of the service, not what the application is doing in itself. -Lot of confusion at the beginning, they thought the part with the connected device interfaces is about IoT - they wondered why is it not there - these doubts were solved. -Question about reference to the TMF and FI-WARE position wrt that - we could not give a good answer. Should add in the document for the final delivery. -Security/trust/privacy: some of them explained that they found some gaps, elements they thought would be necessary to cover as a common GE across different domains, but they didn't find that. E.g. encryption in general and public key management. -What do we think could be the steps/instruments to set up communications and indeed is it a good idea - nice to have communication, but we have a risk that we receive a tsunami of clarification requests and answering these may become a lot of work. Juanjo: mailing list per chapter using the same ID for the mailing list and add a suffix. Could be put in place for the starting. Was discussed that we should have better tools - a task force was set up to come to the next AB meeting (end of August) with proposal for other social, collaborative tools to get in touch with other use case project. Management of innovation, forum - was proposed as one possibility. TID would like to take a look at tools like JCard useful for SW development, maybe useful for collaborative projects as well. In the meantime FI-WARE committed to put in place these means, concretely mailing lists. Alex: Excel spreadsheets to get them organized and keep track of them. Juanjo: it is important that for sure if someone makes a question and we provide an answer, we should keep a trace of that. We could put in place this mechanism in a way to generate this FAQ or spreadsheet mentioned could be a tool generating this. Alex: comments are useful for internal work on the doc. Keep record of the changes/responses - it could be Excel or more modern cooperation tools. Juanjo: how would it work with Excel? Columns with the questions and the answers? What format? Alex: templates that can be use for document reviews. Each row would represent a comment, question or request for clarification. Document the exact chapter, status of the question, the doc has been changed to address that and so on. Juanjo: 2 things - the format of what we aim to generate as a result - could be a table, useful to create the personally asked questions/content that we upload. Second aspect is how to monitor/follow-up the states of each comment and whether it has been addressed or not, how etc. Juanjo would favor using instead of spreadsheet a tracking system, there would be a workflow, producing the content uploaded as a contribution to the FAQ and change this in the document as well. Juanjo: DOW - we promised to put a tracking system to the external world/usage areas - boundary. Alex: agrees. Pier Garino: mailing list should be first answer. In favor of collaborative tools, forum's solution for instance - free to use. Managing them is difficult. So in favor of a tracking tool like bugzilla. Concern: we add overhead. Torsten: objects against mailing lists/tools. Should be based on tasks/activities. Interface between UA projects and us is that they provide user stories/requirements at the end, these are the main concepts that communicate. From our perspective it's the GE. Both of them are in the agile system that we are supposed to keep. Juanjo: 2 different interfaces - one has to do with the creation of backlog - will be elaborated later. Here we are working on a very concrete point raised by UA projects - I need clarification on what you mean by the concrete section of the HLD. Torsten: of course, there might be questions about the content. There could be a structure or we don't have that but have 1 person responsible. We don't need the interface between UA and FI-WARE too broad. Any questions could be attached to a GE, if this is available, we keep track of the backlog, we can create a new task for this element, the task solving a problem or a misunderstanding. Should do the collaboration as focused/concrete as possible. Alex: same system as we keep the stories? Juanjo: difficult to understand for him. It was agreed that we have to start working to set up the backlog for the different enablers in FI-WARE. UA projects understand they are capturing requirements from end users and they will map them to features they would like to see as features in FI-WARE - this we would handle in the backlog. Previous to that we should handle if they do not understand something. They may need the answers in order to provide an input, a request for a feature. Agrees that anything that has to do with asking for a feature and a GE should be handled through the backlog. Answering doubts, clarifying things is different. The resolution of that leads to FAQ corner maybe in the website. Doesn't need to need to a generation of an entry in the backlog. Agree on this? Maybe we should say: there are 2 mechanisms - clarification for things you don't understand in the doc - should lead to the development of FAQ, second channel is anything to do with asking features, through the backlog. Rejected if proposed to the first channel, limited to doubts, clarification. Could we agree with that approach? Andreas: does not understand the concept of answering questions - they should go to global technical activities, somebody who has an overview. If we answer p2p manner, we have exploding communication. Juanjo: for comments/questions we should provide to them only one mailing list? Andreas: not mailing list, system where it can be posted/commented/answered when people can take a look what were the questions before. Otherwise people will ask the same question several times. Juanjo: so in favor to a tracking system? Andreas: yes, and all answered questions to be made available to all people. Juanjo: then we have to agree then about the management of the incoming tickets - handled centralized, allocated to a WP team. Andreas: agrees Hans: fine with the last proposal ATOS: also agrees with this Juanjo: the tool we put in place would be a tracking system. We have to analyse them Torsten: we have forge Juanjo: yes, we can use that or activate other plugins not currently activated. Needs to doublecheck with people from infrastructure Lorant: proposes forge per techincal chapter Juanjo: no strong opinion on this Alex: it is important to know who is asking the question. If opened for the public later on? Juanjo: we should be able to identify the person, should not be an issue. Alex: easier for us if we receive many such questions to understand who is asking what and have few contact points with the UA projects Lorant: maybe just 1 per UA Juanjo: we have to decide tracking system per chapter or per whole. Alex: filter per specific WP? Juanjo: yes, so that we can categorize questions to go to a particular chapter. Later on the changing of this field instead of opening a ticket in another tracking system. Would go for one single tracking system with ability to filter tickets on chapters and to doublecheck that the tool we use supports this. This would be the starting option to explore. -Juanjo: before communicating with the UA projects, Juanjo will send an e-mail to us. Definition of the backlog and how to organize the work -Juanjo sent a template that was agreed for the backlog. Hopes it is more or less self explanatory. For the sake of the time Juanjo will not go through this in very detail. In general it has everything that would be needed to explain a feature that would be requested from a given enabler in FI-WARE. -Points that we need to take into account: -backlog would be used by some UA projects for managing the development of the use case applications, but not all UA projects will follow that path -everyone recognized there are 2 levels that we have to take into accound when embracing the backlog. In a first approach UA projects will interview end users, they would start identifying trends that are high level descriptions of areas they cover, epics that are topics they cover, up to user stories. These later are something concrete that a development could take an input to develop a given part of a use case application. They will follow this process this month, the user stories may generate are not in the format or the way that are useful for FI-WARE. They need to translate things into features they would require from FI-WARE that are meaningful for us. They realized finally that the exercise they have to do when they deal with a user story (end user) from their perspective they need to think how to implement that user story. When analyzing this, they may come with a given need that they have to submit to the FI-WARE path. There are 2 level of users - we have end users, meaningful for UA projects - these are the actors and the main characters in their user stories, but in the backlog the user is the app developer, that is the use case project. They have to generate entrance that is relevant for the platform as part of the process to find out how to solve a user story they might have identified. They will try to implement this. The backlog will have a mix of entries relevant for use case projects for which the notion of user will mean the end user, others will be users for the platform, that is the use case project. It was identified that there is a need to establish that certain field identifies what the user means for a particular entry. -in parallel we ourselves should be able to start filling up the backlog with features with entries for the GE-s that we idntified that we plan to address in the project. Regarding the backlog UA projects and FI-WARE will work in parallel streams therefore: use cases for the FI-WARE platform and us defining entries for the GE-s that we identified. -To start working, a tool will be put in place - Agilefant - Concord will set up this tool. Will make it available before July the 20th. We will start ourselves to work filling the entries corresponding to different chapters and GE-s. -A given UA project when discovering that for implementing a user story they need something from the platform, they may initially formulate an entry, but may not be able to assign this to a particular FI-WARE chapter, because they might not know where this will be address (they may also know). If don't know, we should discuss with them, determine how these entries will lead to either assignment to a chapter in FI-WARE or categorized to 'common enabler' but out of the scope of FI-WARE. This will mean negotiations with them. Is the model clear? -Alex: makes sense. Will there be education on the tool? -Juanjo: we need to set up the tool first (Concord), then some training would be setup, the tool is quite easy, should not be that difficult. -Alex: best practices, metodology - we should agree on -Juanjo: will be addressed during the coming weeks -Juanjo: another thing is about the distiction of the different levels of granularity that we would cover in the backlog. For this Juanjo plans to provide concrete definitions of what an epic, user story etc would be with some examples. Provided along with the accessibility to the tool. We should be able to start filling entries in the backlog -Lorant: no questions at this point -Juanjo: will send an e-mail on details, maybe it is better to write this down. -Pier Garino: guidelines to use the tools - even it takes time - is it possible to provide sort of video capturing the screen and highlighting the main items/actions to use the tool? -Juanjo: agilefant.org already provides this info, even a video, online demo where one can play with the tool. We are not going to use all the features of agilefant, just those ones with the management of backlog entries. -Pier Garino: if looks up the website, might learn in a cold start way, from scratch. If there is a preparation of short demo of what to use of the tool for our purpose only, this would be a warm start. Several partners in his partner were asking the same on forge - took some time to reply to all of them. There are tools capturing screenshots/video what you are doing, just to start doing that. -Juanjo: true, but we may say let's wait and do not start until we have this tutorial/manual and then we may become bottlenecked. Juanjo takes the point and maybe something should be produced what highlights what to use and what not to use. Such manual we should not wait to be perfect -Alex: training sessions were mentioned - could we record them so that other refers them later? -Juanjo: will check. Not sure what technology we could use, there might be some possibilities, point taken. -Hans: agrees with Pier Garino -Andreas: would like to see an example of the life cycle of the backlog -Juanjo: realistically, we could devote the second part of July to carry out the training, prepare the tutorials, additional documentation for the lifecycle of entries, transcoding of UA user stories to FI-WARE user stories, maybe before starting to create entries in a wild manner. -ATOS: no comments/questions -Juanjo: in the AB the way how agilefant will be used was discussed, we need to create docs for this. Some of the UA raised the issue that the planning that we had in place was very tough, they anticipated they may be late. AoB for AB: -No questions on the arch board Where we are: -IoT: will produce final version by end of the week. No input from security. Question marks are referring only to security, might add 1 or 2 points based on the received comments. -Juanjo: one generic comment - unique selling point section. It becomes (like ASE people recommended) "critical product attributes". Juanjo would like feed -IoT: agrees -Pier Garino/Hans: Juanjo - peer review with cloud hosting chapter, comments were received? A: shared with Juanjo and Alex end of last week concerning a point the cloud edge definition. Worked on a proposal to modify the text so that there are less conflicting between the 2 enablers from the 2 different chapters. More in general reviewed the content of cloud hosting, they are adding comments to the document, taking as a baseline the purpose to identify points difficult to understand by the readers. Purpose is to send it tomorrow to Alex for revision and decide whether to accept comments or not. -Juanjo: suggestion is to discuss on the weekly conf call on Friday during 15:30, go through them there. -Pier Garino: OoO for several weeks, agrees to discuss it with Alex. -Juanjo: recommends 15:30. Alex can't make it. Recommends that Juanjo and team synchronizes. -Juanjo: takes the call with them, go through most of the thing and understand the insight on the comment. Alex will work on Sunday. If any doubt, Alex will contact Juanjo. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jhierro at tid.es Sun Jul 17 16:22:10 2011 From: jhierro at tid.es (Juanjo Hierro) Date: Sun, 17 Jul 2011 16:22:10 +0200 Subject: [Fiware-wpl] Integration of final official release of the FI-WARE High-level description document Message-ID: <4E22F012.5000205@tid.es> Dear all, We should deal with integration of the different contribs to the FI-WARE High-level Description (Product Vision) document in the coming days. Please use the same placeholders located in the /Fi-WARE deliverables/D.2.2 FI-WARE High-level Description/D.2.2 contribs subfolder you used for the integration of the delivered draft. I assume that you have worked based on the versions that were uploaded in those placeholders once the official draft was generated. This is very important because I had fixed a lot of issues dealing with word styles and formatting. This time I will be much more rigorous so I may reject contributions where I find wrong styles so that you fix them. I expect that contributions related to each chapter be uploaded in the D.2.2 contribs subfolder by late tomorrow (i.e., Monday July 18th). Please send a short message announcing when your contribution has been uploaded. I may connect just to make a quick check that styles are ok, but I won't start the integration of the different chapters until Tuesday July 19th. If you have additional late contributions you want to submit on Tuesday while I have blocked access to a given chapter, please upload them in the "D.2.2 additional contribs" folder I have also created (of course, I will need the instructions for handling those assuming I have integrated the chapter already) Thanks all of you for your great work. Best regards, -- Juanjo 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 -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: jhierro.vcf Type: text/x-vcard Size: 429 bytes Desc: not available URL: From jhierro at tid.es Mon Jul 18 00:47:30 2011 From: jhierro at tid.es (Juanjo Hierro) Date: Mon, 18 Jul 2011 00:47:30 +0200 Subject: [Fiware-wpl] Next steps regarding the FI-WARE High-level Description (Product Vision) Message-ID: <4E236682.8050306@tid.es> Hi all, Some of you have asked me about what is expected for the second release of the FI-WARE High-level Description (Product Vision) document as compared to the first release we have produced. Let me elaborate here on this matter as well as what to do (regarding the FI-WARE High-level Description) once we have generated the official deliverable. The first thing I would like to point out is that we wish to manage publication and maintenance/evolution of this deliverable rather differently than in standard european FP7 projects. It doesn't make sense to generate a .pdf, make it publicly available and then, end of the story. Many people simply won't download such a big document. We will also probably need to update some parts of it from time to time ... are we going to generate an updated version of it every few weeks in order to allow third parties to get access to the most updated version of its contents ? It has no sense. How are we going to do then ? Well, the idea is to create the contents of the public Wiki of the project and make it a substantial piece of the website. WPLs and WPAs will have the rights to edit contents of the Wiki and will also have the right to assign editing rights to those members of their teams they find appropriate. Translating contents of the FI-WARE High-level Description (Product Vision) in a public Wiki help to achieve several goals. In the first place, it will help us to enhance our website with a rather useful complete description of what the project is about. Nowadays, many people today have a look at web pages rather than downloadable documents when they try to evaluate whether some project is of their interest or not. Therefore, transforming contents of the FI-WARE High-level Description into web content (through a Wiki) is helpful. Secondly, having a Wiki would allow each team to introduce small and frequent changes (mostly enhancements) in a very straightforward manner and all the potential audience will benefit (we don't need to notify them they should download a new version of the document because they will access the Wiki anytime the wish to access the contents). Indeed, our plan is to forward the EC an URL to the Wiki for the first official review of this deliverable, whenever it happens. Indeed, the second release of this deliverable should already be just the URL to the (updated) Wiki. We hope to setup the public Wiki instance for FI-WARE soon (hopefully during next week). We need to setup the infrastructure and, most importantly, think about the structure of contents in the Wiki (since it won't just include the contents of the FI-WARE High-level Description). Your input on this matter is welcome. Now, going to the question about the "second release" of the FI-WARE High-level Description let me first formulate it the right way: What should be new there in the FI-WARE High-level Description content of the Wiki by the end of September ? ... Well ... this is my vision: * We will update some of the contents because we feel like something can be better described: in response to some comments we wish to address, because we have got the answer to some question that we had just formulated at the time the first release was generated (some of them already listed in the "Question Marks" section), because we may have decided to add some GE or, simply, because we wish to update some part. I do not expect these will be changes that will change radically what we will deliver this week. It will be just the result of applying a number of enhancements over time. * For those chapters (e.g., IoT Service Enablement) where we have described sub-chapters and haven't provided so much information about GEs, I would also expect a little bit of more detail about GEs. The target length of the description of a GE would be that followed in chapters like the Cloud Hosting or the Data/Context Management chapters. * We will add sections indicating what assets we plan to rely on to develop a first working reference implementation of each of the GEs we have identified. I still do not intend to produce too much paperwork here because it will not be a matter of "re-editing" existing documentation about assets to make it comply with FI-WARE templates or anything like that. We should just include links (URLs) to publicly available and already existing documentation about these assets. Based on the the above, I do not expect that we will produce too many new pages (i.e., new content in the Wiki) in addition to the existing ones already produced for the initial release of the FI-WARE High-level Description. It will be mostly the result of keeping contents of the Wiki up to date and include a number of sections dealing with links to available documentation on assets we plan to rely on (we will have to discuss how to format this in our plenary meeting in September in order to decide, e.g., whether we should include a section at the same level as "target usage" or "GE description" per each of the GEs or have a single section per chapter, describing all the assets and how we plan to integrate them) Also based on the above, the activities on which we should concentrate now and until at least our plenary at mid September are related to actually agreeing on what assets we plan to rely on, how we plan to evolve and integrate them, and solve some of the questions we have left pending for discussion (some of them related to dependencies about chapters). Therefore, actual discussions, no paperwork. This activities should be carried out in parallel to definition of the FI-WARE backlog (I will elaborate on this in the following email). Each team is free to organize these activities the way they prefer, but I would suggest to define a number of Task Forces, each focused on some particular topic and carried out through a number of workshops (they may be virtual, based on the usage of some kind of confcall+webex facilities) where topics are discussed and final decisions/action-points agreed. Please share contents of this message with your respective teams. Cheers, -- Juanjo ________________________________ 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: jhierro.vcf Type: text/x-vcard Size: 429 bytes Desc: not available URL: From thomas.michael.bohnert at sap.com Mon Jul 18 16:51:42 2011 From: thomas.michael.bohnert at sap.com (Bohnert, Thomas Michael) Date: Mon, 18 Jul 2011 16:51:42 +0200 Subject: [Fiware-wpl] [Fiware-wpa] Fwd: [FI-PPP AB] Invitation: ServiceWave 2011 FI PPP Session In-Reply-To: <4E19ACF8.4040002@tid.es> References: <4E19ACF8.4040002@tid.es> Message-ID: <771C9B001456D64783596DDC3801C6EA2812EE4003@DEWDFECCR09.wdf.sap.corp> My reply is too late but positive! Thomas From: fiware-wpa-bounces at lists.fi-ware.eu [mailto:fiware-wpa-bounces at lists.fi-ware.eu] On Behalf Of Juanjo Hierro Sent: Sonntag, 10. Juli 2011 15:45 To: fiware-wpl at lists.fi-ware.eu; fiware-wpa at lists.fi-ware.eu; fiware-pcc at lists.fi-ware.eu Subject: [Fiware-wpa] Fwd: [FI-PPP AB] Invitation: ServiceWave 2011 FI PPP Session Hi all, I would like to call your attention about the attached message. I guess it would be worth to contribute with a paper on FI-WARE to the technical FI PPP session that has been planned in the ServiceWave 2011 event. It shouldn't be that difficult once we have produced the FI-WARE High-level Description deliverable. Please let me know what do you think. It seems like we have to respond by July 14, so that I would like to get your replies by email before that date. Then we may discuss how we can plan writing the paper during our confcall on July 14th (I remind you there was a doodle I setup to find out the best timeslot for the confcall in which we will brief you on results of our FI-PPP AB meeting) Best regards, -- Juanjo -------- Original Message -------- Subject: [FI-PPP AB] Invitation: ServiceWave 2011 FI PPP Session Date: Sat, 9 Jul 2011 20:05:31 +0200 From: Metzger, Andreas To: ab at fi-ppp.eu CC: clarissa.marquezan at paluno.uni-due.de Dear FI PPP colleagues, Based on the positive response of many of you, we are happy to announce that ServiceWave 2011 will feature a technical FI PPP session. On behalf of the ServiceWave 2011 General Chair, Klaus Pohl, I cordially invite you to present the first technical outcomes of your project during that session. In addition, we are happy to offer you to write a paper between 2-12 pages which will be published in the ServiceWave 2011 Springer LNCS proceedings (CRC deadline is August, 10). As you can see from the attached flyer, the FI PPP session is scheduled to take place on day 1 of the conference, following the FIA sessions in the morning and preceded by an opening keynote from the EC. After the FI PPP session, there will be the joint FIA/FIRE/ServiceWave demonstration evening, which last time attracted well over 200 participants. We look forward to your positive response and kindly ask you to please confirm your contribution by July, 14, such that we can start advertising. Thus, please also send us the tentative title of your presentation and let us know whether you would like to contribute a paper to the proceedings. Very best regards, Andreas PS: Please apologize multiple receptions of this e-mail. It has been resent, as it did not reach all AB members. -- Dr. Andreas Metzger Research group leader 'Software and Service Quality' Paluno (The Ruhr Institute for Software Technology) * University of Duisburg-Essen Gerlingstra?e 16 * 45127 Essen * Germany * callto:+49-201-183-4650 * fax:+49-201-183-4699 mailto:andreas.metzger at paluno.uni-due.de * http://www.paluno.eu * VAT-Nr. DE811272995 -- ________________________________ 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 Jul 19 06:24:08 2011 From: jhierro at tid.es (JUAN JOSE HIERRO SUREDA) Date: Tue, 19 Jul 2011 06:24:08 +0200 Subject: [Fiware-wpl] FI-WARE WPL/WPA confcall Message-ID: <4FE737A7257DB84C8CB36B7DFAFCC1CB4A01E1EEDF@EXCLU2K7.hi.inet> When: Tuesday, July 19, 2011 9:00 AM-10:00 AM. Romance Standard Time *~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~* Confcall to check status of the integration of the final official deliverable. We will use powwownow with PIN 050662. Dial-in numbers in the attachment 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 -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: text/calendar Size: 2269 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Powwownow-dial-in-numbers.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 61516 bytes Desc: Powwownow-dial-in-numbers.pdf URL: From jhierro at tid.es Tue Jul 19 09:12:13 2011 From: jhierro at tid.es (Juanjo Hierro) Date: Tue, 19 Jul 2011 09:12:13 +0200 Subject: [Fiware-wpl] We are just three at the confcall !! Message-ID: <4E252E4D.8040702@tid.es> It's only Lorant, Thomas and me who are in the confcall we agreed to have in order to follow-up progress of the integration of the different chapters. Best regards, -- Juanjo 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 -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: jhierro.vcf Type: text/x-vcard Size: 429 bytes Desc: not available URL: From pascal.bisson at thalesgroup.com Tue Jul 19 11:11:06 2011 From: pascal.bisson at thalesgroup.com (BISSON Pascal) Date: Tue, 19 Jul 2011 11:11:06 +0200 Subject: [Fiware-wpl] FI-WARE WPL/WPA confcall In-Reply-To: <4FE737A7257DB84C8CB36B7DFAFCC1CB4A01E1EEDF@EXCLU2K7.hi.inet> References: <4FE737A7257DB84C8CB36B7DFAFCC1CB4A01E1EEDF@EXCLU2K7.hi.inet> Message-ID: <9940_1311066668_4E254A2C_9940_5039_1_34cba996-f120-4999-a0d9-d1e3fe90d28a@THSONEA01HUB01P.one.grp> Apologize since nor me nor Daniel could make it this time. We will catch up on things through the minutes of this audio. Regards, Pascal -----Rendez-vous d'origine----- De : JUAN JOSE HIERRO SUREDA [mailto:jhierro at tid.es] Envoy? : mardi 19 juillet 2011 06:24 ? : Fiware-wpl at lists.fi-ware.eu; Fiware-wpa at lists.fi-ware.eu; thomas.michael.bohnert at sap.com Objet : [Fiware-wpl] FI-WARE WPL/WPA confcall Date : mardi 19 juillet 2011 09:00-10:00 (GMT+01:00) Bruxelles, Copenhague, Madrid, Paris. O? : Confcall to check status of the integration of the final official deliverable. We will use powwownow with PIN 050662. Dial-in numbers in the attachment 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 << Fichier: Powwownow-dial-in-numbers.pdf >> << Fichier: ATT00001.txt >> -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jhierro at tid.es Tue Jul 19 14:10:29 2011 From: jhierro at tid.es (Juanjo Hierro) Date: Tue, 19 Jul 2011 14:10:29 +0200 Subject: [Fiware-wpl] Status of the FI-WARE High-level Description deliverable Message-ID: <4E257435.3080705@tid.es> Hi all, A brief summary of the status, also commented this morning: * A new version of the Cloud Hosting chapter had been produced on Sunday. It already covered comments from the I2ND team and additional comments done by TID. Juanjo has then produced a new version that cover the changes dealing with the right distribution of cloud proxy functionalities between the Cloud Hosting and I2ND chapter. * A new version of the I2ND chapter has been produced on Monday as planned covering comments from the Cloud Hosting team. Juanjo has then produced a new version that cover the changes dealing with the right distribution of cloud proxy functionalities between the Cloud Hosting and I2ND chapter. * Due to the fact that the changes in the cloud proxy sections have to be reviewed by the Cloud Hosting and I2ND teams, we need to delay the start of the integration one day. Therefore, all chapters will have one additional day to implement any further changes they wish to incorporate. * The IoT Service Enablement chapter has produced a new version of the chapter addressing the comments by the Data/Context Management chapter. This has been uploaded to the docman system on Monday. * The Apps/Service ecosystem has sent their comments to the Security chapter and it seems like the Security team has been able to upload a new version on the server. * The Security chapter was intended to produce their comments on the Apps/Service Ecosystem chapter by Monday but couldn't finalize this task. They were supposed to provide their input today. Since we have one additional day, we hope that the Apps/Service Ecosystem team will be able to review it (note: it would be nice if Pascal or Andreas can update us on the status of this) * The Data/Context Management chapter has not yet finalized the actions derived from comments made by the IoT team and some other comments identified internally. We hope to get it done by late this evening. Overall, it was decided to start the integration tomorrow. We'll see whether the final document can be delivered by Wednesday or Thursday. Chapter editors are encouraged to put their contributions in "pending" state, whenever they plan to download a version and change it. Juanjo will also change the status to "pending" whenever he has taken the editor token in a given chapter. Best regards, -- Juanjo ________________________________ 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: jhierro.vcf Type: text/x-vcard Size: 429 bytes Desc: not available URL: From pascal.bisson at thalesgroup.com Tue Jul 19 14:24:29 2011 From: pascal.bisson at thalesgroup.com (BISSON Pascal) Date: Tue, 19 Jul 2011 14:24:29 +0200 Subject: [Fiware-wpl] Status of the FI-WARE High-level Description deliverable In-Reply-To: <4E257435.3080705@tid.es> References: <4E257435.3080705@tid.es> Message-ID: <9941_1311078276_4E257783_9941_2673_1_ec36c92f-52f5-4745-b5ee-3b62790b5363@THSONEA01HUB02P.one.grp> Dear Juanjo and colleagues, I confirm that: ? an update of the Security chapter has been uploaded on the repository (indeed yesterday). This update addresses comments we got from peer-review performed by WP3. ? we (Thales) are in the process to review the Apps chapter and will send our review to WP3 (Andreas) no later than today (EOB). Hope I have clarified. And once more apologize for the small delay introduced in our peer-review. Regards, Pascal De : fiware-wpl-bounces at lists.fi-ware.eu [mailto:fiware-wpl-bounces at lists.fi-ware.eu] De la part de Juanjo Hierro Envoy? : mardi 19 juillet 2011 14:10 ? : fiware-wpl at lists.fi-ware.eu; fiware-wpa at lists.fi-ware.eu Objet : [Fiware-wpl] Status of the FI-WARE High-level Description deliverable Hi all, A brief summary of the status, also commented this morning: * A new version of the Cloud Hosting chapter had been produced on Sunday. It already covered comments from the I2ND team and additional comments done by TID. Juanjo has then produced a new version that cover the changes dealing with the right distribution of cloud proxy functionalities between the Cloud Hosting and I2ND chapter. * A new version of the I2ND chapter has been produced on Monday as planned covering comments from the Cloud Hosting team. Juanjo has then produced a new version that cover the changes dealing with the right distribution of cloud proxy functionalities between the Cloud Hosting and I2ND chapter. * Due to the fact that the changes in the cloud proxy sections have to be reviewed by the Cloud Hosting and I2ND teams, we need to delay the start of the integration one day. Therefore, all chapters will have one additional day to implement any further changes they wish to incorporate. * The IoT Service Enablement chapter has produced a new version of the chapter addressing the comments by the Data/Context Management chapter. This has been uploaded to the docman system on Monday. * The Apps/Service ecosystem has sent their comments to the Security chapter and it seems like the Security team has been able to upload a new version on the server. * The Security chapter was intended to produce their comments on the Apps/Service Ecosystem chapter by Monday but couldn't finalize this task. They were supposed to provide their input today. Since we have one additional day, we hope that the Apps/Service Ecosystem team will be able to review it (note: it would be nice if Pascal or Andreas can update us on the status of this) * The Data/Context Management chapter has not yet finalized the actions derived from comments made by the IoT team and some other comments identified internally. We hope to get it done by late this evening. Overall, it was decided to start the integration tomorrow. We'll see whether the final document can be delivered by Wednesday or Thursday. Chapter editors are encouraged to put their contributions in "pending" state, whenever they plan to download a version and change it. Juanjo will also change the status to "pending" whenever he has taken the editor token in a given chapter. Best regards, -- Juanjo ________________________________ 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 Thu Jul 21 10:04:35 2011 From: jhierro at tid.es (Juanjo Hierro) Date: Thu, 21 Jul 2011 10:04:35 +0200 Subject: [Fiware-wpl] Update on status of deliverable Message-ID: <4E27DD93.4050304@tid.es> Hi all, I have had to travel these two days because of a management summit at Telefonica R&D and, unfortunately, I haven't been able to be connected as I expected so I haven't been able to finish the job of integrating the final release of the deliverable. I hope that I will get it done by tomorrow, though. If you find like you wish to update your chapter for whatever reason, don't hesitate to do so unless you see that your file is on "pending" status at the docman system. Best regards, -- Juanjo 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 -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: jhierro.vcf Type: text/x-vcard Size: 429 bytes Desc: not available URL: From matteo.melideo at eng.it Tue Jul 26 10:55:30 2011 From: matteo.melideo at eng.it (Matteo Melideo) Date: Tue, 26 Jul 2011 10:55:30 +0200 Subject: [Fiware-wpl] WP9 FI-WARE DevComE deliverable Message-ID: <4E2E8102.7010201@eng.it> Dear Wp Leaders, in Wp9 we have produced the first version of FI-WARE DevComE Technical description v1.0. The document is still under the revision of the PCC but we think it is important to circulate this document anyway to collect as much feedbacks\comments as possible before the plenary in Turin and, if possible, arrange also some conference calls with you. In this respect, it would be really helpful for us to have a contact point from each Work package acting as interface with the Wp9 and available for a short interview. Sorry for bothering you with an additional document to read but this is very short (and probably enjoyable :-) ) and we consider your feedbacks extremely important for the future developments. Thanks in advance and best regards, Matteo Melideo -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: FI-WARE DevComE Technical description v1.0.pdf Type: application/applefile Size: 1674982 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: matteo_melideo.vcf Type: text/x-vcard Size: 354 bytes Desc: not available URL: From jhierro at tid.es Thu Jul 28 03:24:44 2011 From: jhierro at tid.es (Juanjo Hierro) Date: Thu, 28 Jul 2011 03:24:44 +0200 Subject: [Fiware-wpl] VERY IMPORTANT: Coordination of FI-WARE backlog related activities Message-ID: <4E30BA5C.6010300@tid.es> Hi all, Once we have dealt with the FI-WARE High-level Description (Product Vision) we have to start working in three major tasks on which we should concentrate our efforts until our plenary meeting in Turin: 1. Launch of activities dealing with final decision on assets and the creation of the FI-WARE backlog 2. Management of relationship with FI-PPP UC projects 3. Launch of activities dealing with development of contents of the FI-WARE website (setup of the public Wiki and start of activities in blogs) This email elaborates on the first two points. We will review this in the confcall we have scheduled for July 28, 11:30am Cheers, -- Juanjo 1. Launch of activities dealing with final decision on assets and the creation of the FI-WARE backlog At this point, I assume that you already understand the basis of how we plan to use Agile in our project. It summary, we will use it for managing the FI-WARE requirements, which will take the form of entries in what we refer as the FI-WARE backlog. In any case, please review the presentation I made during our kick-off meeting in May: https://forge.fi-ware.eu/docman/view.php/7/37/FI-WARE+agile+Intro+vfinal.pptx Following is the list of steps and considerations to take into account when launching the activities dealing with final decision on assets and the creation of the FI-WARE backlog: * The first step we have to deal with has to do with closing the decision on the assets we will adopt as baseline for the reference implementation of each of the GEs. For this, every WP will have to come with a first proposal by August 31st on what asset, from what project+partner, will be adopted as baseline for the reference implementation of each of the GEs in the corresponding chapter. The different WP/chapter teams have to start this exercise now. It may not be feasible to close the mapping of assets for each of the GEs identified in a given chapter. This may be particularly the case for assets related to GEs for which there are still may points under discussion. It may also happen that we have identified assets for some of the components of a GE but not all. But at least we should have a relatively mature list of assets identified for the main GEs in each chapter by August 31st. This represents a first action point on WPLs and WPAs. * Then we have to start to populate the FI-WARE backlog as soon as the asset(s) for a given GE have been identified. * The fields for entries in the FI-PPP backlog (which includes the Fi-WARE backlog) have already been defined and correspond to the ones described in the attached template (spreadsheet). Note that entries in the FI-PPP backlog will not comprise just features/user-stories linked to FI-WARE GEs but to other platform enablers which may happen to be common to several applications while still domain-specific. If you have any question/doubt regarding semantics of any field in the template, please let Thomas or me know. * Regarding tools to create, maintain and manage requests on entries of the FI-PPP backlog, the following has been agreed: * The FI-PPP will use Agilefant in order to perform the overall management of entries in backlogs. The FI-PPP will go for a configuration where we will define multiple backlogs in Agilefant. One per GE in each chapter, one covering entries for all the still uncategorized platform enablers, one (at least) for other platform enablers that are common but domain-specific (therefore out of the scope of FI-WARE) and one per each of the UC projects that wish to use Agilefant to manage their own application backlog. This with the ability to transfer entries from one backlog to another. * However, Agilefant is pretty simple, and entries of a backlog in Agilefant cannot be flexibly configured as to contain all of the fields we have defined for the FI-PPP backlog template (attached). Therefore, the description field of each entry in an Agilefant backlog will have to include an URL link to a page on a Wiki (based on Wikimedia) where all fields for that entry, as defined in the attached spreadsheet, can be fully specified. Regarding entries linked to the FI-WARE backlogs, and probably also for entries linked to platform enablers in general, this wiki will be provided by FI-WARE. Thomas or me will provide concrete instructions on how to create backlog entries in the Wiki and in Agilefant before Thursday next week. In the meantime, you may wish to start working on entries, just using spreadsheets following the attached template. * FI-WARE will put in place some system to manage the lifecycle of requests to create new entries in the FI-WARE backlogs or modify existing ones by third parties. This tool should not be offered just to UC projects but to the general public, because we have to be open to other communities. Most probably this tool will be the tracker system in FusionForge but we are still analyzing whether it could be managed directly through Agilefant, defining an intermediate backlog about "request for platform enablers" where request for entries formulated by UC projects would be created and only transferred to the FI-WARE backlogs when agreed with FI-WARE. However, the issue of dealing with other third parties/communities may lead to the need to put a more formal system such as tracker. We will inform before Thursday next week about what tool has been decided and what will be the procedures to follow. * One point that was already understood and agreed during the FI-PPP AB is that requirements from end-users on applications to be developed by UC projects are different from requirements on FI-WARE (on platform enablers in general). During investigation of a end-user requirement "X" (no matter if it is a Theme, an EPIC or an user-story), a given UC project may conclude that it needs to rely on a platform that support a number of features "a", "b", and "c" plus develop an application implementing functionalities "M", "N", "O" on top of that platform. These "a", "b" and "c" features should translate into entries initially linked to the "platform enablers" backlog. Some of them will finally be addressed in FI-WARE so therefore will be transferred to the FI-WARE backlog. Whether we will manage this transference directly on Agilefant or through a tracker system, is something to decide. Nevertheless, note that specification of "X", "M", "N", "O" will not be part of the FI-WARE backlog. The level of concreteness is also different: "X" and even "M", "N" and "O" may be very concrete, with a quite detailed specification. However, "a", "b" and "c", at the time they are formulated by a UC project, may be just in the form of a "theme" or "epic", according to Agile terminology. * At a given point in time, features "a", "b" and "c" will be submitted to FI-WARE for consideration. FI-WARE will then determine whether the feature is considered inside the scope of FI-WARE and what priority is finally assigned. This decision will most probably imply several interactions with the UC projects that have identified the features. As mentioned before, we will come in the coming days with a concrete proposal on tools and procedures adopted for managing this process. * During this process, UC projects may additionally require further clarifications about what we intend to deliver in a given chapter, for a given GE. In other words, they may ask for clarifications on parts of the FI-WARE High-level Description (Product Vision). This should be driven in a formal manner, to avoid getting into chaos. Therefore, a specific tracker system associated to the Product Vision will be put in place for UC projects (and the general public) to formulate their questions. Explanations given to resolve tickets should lead to creation/update of contents in a FAQ Wiki we should start creating. * Parallel to UC projects running the process described above, FI-WARE should, own its own, work in defining entries for the FI-WARE backlogs. Whether they will be still generic ("themes" or "epics") or already detailed as to be ready for implementation will depend on how clear we have things regarding the GEs in each of the chapters. There are three different types of entries that FI-WARE chapter teams should be able to generate from now until the Turing meeting (as a first milestone) * Entries related to new functional or non-functional features we need to implement in an asset adopted as baseline for the development of the reference implementation of a given GE (or part of it), in order to cover the gap between what that given asset supports at the time it is contributed by a given partner to the project and what it should support to actually become (part of) a reference implementation of the given GE. * Entries related to new functional or non-functional features we wish to implement in an asset adopted as baseline for the development of the reference implementation of a given GE (or part of it), in order to further evolve it and therefore, evolve the corresponding GE (since GEs specifications may evolve over time and offer different functionality in subsequent releases of FI-WARE) * Entries related to integration of assets, in those cases where an asset has to be combined with other assets to build the reference implementation of a given GE. Note that these entries are different than those ones related to implementing interfaces/protocols, etc in an asset implementing (part of) a GE, in order to support integration with another GE, because interfaces/protocols enabling integration of GEs should be part of their open specifications and, therefore, should be considered a particular case of points 1. or 2. * Note, that regarding a given feature request, there will be essentially five scenarios: * The feature applies to some of the GEs we have already identified in the FI-WARE High-level Description, and for which an asset has already been identified (therefore we have already identified entries for it in the FI-WARE backlog) * The feature applies to some of the GEs we have already identified in the FI-WARE High-level Description, but for which an asset hasn't already been identified (it is a gap we have already identified that none of the partners in FI-WARE is able to fill contributing an asset) * The feature applies to some GE we hadn't identified initially in FI-WARE (in the FI-WARE High-level Description) but we agree to incorporate it in the roadmap, despite no partner has an asset that can be contributed as baseline for development of a reference implementation * The feature applies to some GE we hadn't identified initially in FI-WARE (in the FI-WARE High-level Description) but we agree to incorporate it, and there is a partner that has an asset that may be contributed as baseline for development of a reference implementation * The feature applies to some enabler we hadn't identified initially in FI-WARE and we don't agree to accept it as GE since it is a common, yet domain-specific, platform enabler, but not a GE The first case will lead to negotiation of priorities between us and the UC project. The second and third case will lead to requirements that we should take into account in our Open Calls. The fourth case require careful consideration because we won't be able to change the assignment of resources to a given partner. We need to calibrate whether the partner can adjust its efforts to deal with more GEs that the originally expected (maybe addressing less new functionality in each) or we should finally lead to definition of requirements for an Open Call. * Despite the most active UC projects may start creating some initial requests for entries in the FI-WARE backlog during August, I do not expect so much activity, so keep going on your own, generating entries in the FI-WARE backlogs based on the principles of the previous point. During September negotiations with UC projects should become more intense. We indeed agreed with the UC projects to have a milestone by end of September in which we should already have produced a number of entries in the FI-WARE backlogs on our own, and they should have been produced some requests for entries in our FI-WARE backlogs. A period of negotiation/consolidation is then planned, which should end by end of November, with the first official release of the FI-WARE backlog to be considered for the first release of FI-WARE and also a clear definition of what we are going to request in the first Open Call of FI-WARE ________________________________ 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: Backlog entries description v0 1 11-07-12.xls Type: application/vnd.ms-excel Size: 52224 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: jhierro.vcf Type: text/x-vcard Size: 429 bytes Desc: not available URL: From jhierro at tid.es Thu Jul 28 03:52:35 2011 From: jhierro at tid.es (Juanjo Hierro) Date: Thu, 28 Jul 2011 03:52:35 +0200 Subject: [Fiware-wpl] VERY IMPORTANT: Coordination of FI-WARE backlog related activities In-Reply-To: <4E30BA5C.6010300@tid.es> References: <4E30BA5C.6010300@tid.es> Message-ID: <4E30C0E3.5040002@tid.es> On 28/07/11 03:24, Juanjo Hierro wrote: * Parallel to UC projects running the process described above, FI-WARE should, own its own, work in defining entries for the FI-WARE backlogs. Whether they will be still generic ("themes" or "epics") or already detailed as to be ready for implementation will depend on how clear we have things regarding the GEs in each of the chapters. There are three different types of entries that FI-WARE chapter teams should be able to generate from now until the Turing meeting (as a first milestone) * Entries related to new functional or non-functional features we need to implement in an asset adopted as baseline for the development of the reference implementation of a given GE (or part of it), in order to cover the gap between what that given asset supports at the time it is contributed by a given partner to the project and what it should support to actually become (part of) a reference implementation of the given GE. * Entries related to new functional or non-functional features we wish to implement in an asset adopted as baseline for the development of the reference implementation of a given GE (or part of it), in order to further evolve it and therefore, evolve the corresponding GE (since GEs specifications may evolve over time and offer different functionality in subsequent releases of FI-WARE) * Entries related to integration of assets, in those cases where an asset has to be combined with other assets to build the reference implementation of a given GE. Note that these entries are different than those ones related to implementing interfaces/protocols, etc in an asset implementing (part of) a GE, in order to support integration with another GE, because interfaces/protocols enabling integration of GEs should be part of their open specifications and, therefore, should be considered a particular case of points 1. or 2. A very IMPORTANT note: entries in the backlog should not describe what the assets adopted as baseline already provide, but what must, should, could be developed in those assets (see MoSCoW priority field in the attached template for FI-WARE backlog entries). Remember that entries in the backlog are about "work to be done". The second release of the FI-WARE High-level Description (Product Vision) should include a dedicated section per GE elaborating on the asset selected as baseline, which mostly will contain links to existing documentation which explains what the asset already provides today (user's/programmers guide, etc) Best regards, -- Juanjo. ________________________________ 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: jhierro.vcf Type: text/x-vcard Size: 429 bytes Desc: not available URL: From jhierro at tid.es Thu Jul 28 04:06:40 2011 From: jhierro at tid.es (Juanjo Hierro) Date: Thu, 28 Jul 2011 04:06:40 +0200 Subject: [Fiware-wpl] Fwd: Re: [FI-PPP AB] SafeCity initial feedback on the High Level Description document Message-ID: <4E30C430.7090606@tid.es> Dear colleagues, Please find enclosed, if you read bottom-up: * A message sent by the Safecity UC project providing initial feedback on our FI-WARE High-level Description draft * My initial response to their comments WPLs/WPAs of the Cloud, Data/Context Management, I2ND and Security Chapters are entitled to: * Review the comments from Safecity (see attached document) * Review my response and confirm they are Ok or comment on them I believe it is worth answering quickly to this first set of comments to demostrate responsiveness to UC projects inputs. Please try to provide your feedback asap, tomorrow noon at the latest. Thanks and best regards, -- Juanjo -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Re: [FI-PPP AB] SafeCity initial feedback on the High Level Description document Date: Wed, 27 Jul 2011 06:07:24 +0200 From: Juanjo Hierro To: ab at fi-ppp.eu CC: safecity-ptc at hi-research.eu Hi Peretz and Roberto, Thanks very much for your input. We promise to come back with a more detailed response later once we analyze your input document together with experts from the Cloud, Data/Context Management, I2ND and Security teams. However, let me share with you a very quick response to your comments just on my own (therefore you cannot take it as definitive): 1. On the issue about private Clouds: There is nothing in the definition of FI-WARE that prevents you to setup your own private Cloud or, more specifically, your own virtual infrastructure on the Cloud where your applications are only accessible through private, dedicated, connections. Remember that a fundamental concept in FI-WARE is that there is not "single universal FI-WARE Instance" as such. A trial in phase 2 may setup its own dedicated FI-WARE instance, although it's true that several trials may agree to share a FI-WARE Instance. As a security measure, for example, you may decide to setup your own FI-WARE Cloud Hosting Instance were you plan to host just your applications. You may also, share a FI-WARE Cloud Hosting Instance with other trials, but configure your IaaS virtual infrastructure so that your applications hosted there are only accessible through dedicated VPN connections, for example. It is up to a trial in phase 2 to decide what is the FI-WARE Instance(s) it is going to rely on and, as a consequence, who is going to play the roles of FI-WARE Instance Providers in the trial. In addition, it is up to the FI-WARE Instance Provider to determine how a given FI-WARE Instance is setup and configured. Besides, it is up to the Application Provider to decide what sort of virtual infrastructure it wants to setup to host its applications. As an example, you may setup in your trial a FI-WARE Instance that includes Cloud Hosting capabilities and allows to setup virtual hosting infrastructures that host applications only available through VPNs or even more private/dedicated connections. All concepts regarding FI-WARE Instances, FI-WARE Instance Providers, etc were defined in the "FI-WARE Overall Vision" chapter. Nevertheless, your comment raise the fact that some of the explanations we have provided are not that clear and that is what really matters (like when you compare Quality of Experience vs Quality of Service :-) We were finishing integration of the official deliverable and expecting to get it done by today, a little bit late compared to what it was expected, but I believe that is worth trying to introduce the necessary changes that may clarify this matter. Of course, we will not be able to solve all the questions. We plan to continuously enhance the description, as comments like yours arrive and are handled. I take the opportunity to clarify that the kind of advanced features we described in the Cloud Hosting and the I2ND chapters related to dynamic management of network resources are mostly oriented to go beyond existing Cloud hosting services in order to take the most of available network resources, being able to use spare network resources (capacity) when they exist. Currently, you can setup a VPN to your application hosted in the Cloud, but your connection has a established bandwidth and doesn't change so dynamically. As a consequence, if your application is not using the whole bandwith during a certain period of time, another application you may own cannot use the spare bandwith and increase its VPN bandwidth during the period (both VPNs may have been setup through the same physical, private communication line). Essentially, we are trying to have more dynamic solutions here and translate the same kind of concepts used in current Clouds regarding management of computing resources to network resources. But this is something that goes beyond your most critical need, which would be that of creating private Clouds or, more specifically, Clouds accessible through virtual private connections. There, I can assure you that you would get your requirement fulfilled as explained above. I believe it was inherent in the description of the Cloud Hosting chapter since we describe there that VPNs, etc may be part of the IaaS virtual infrastructure you may define for your application (this is referred as the IaaS Service Manifest). However, it seems like we just need to state that more explicitly because apparently you derived that setting up private Clouds where applications are accessible through dedicated virtual private connections was not possible, and that is wrong. 2. On the issue about multi-media analysis: As you explain in your document, there are multiple ways to solve an scenario like the one you describe. But precisely that is the point. FI-WARE is a general purpose platform, therefore, it doesn't dictate neither how a particular FI-WARE Instance has to be setup for a particular trial, nor how applications will be designed to use that FI-WARE Instance. We follow here a fundamental principle in design of general-purpose platforms: if you take many decisions on behalf of the application designer and provider, you will end up taking the worst ones. The two possible solutions you describe for your scenario can be programmend to run on FI-WARE Instances. Both. It is up to you to decide what is the one that better suites your needs. I have to say that you mention in your document that while the two solutions are valid, the second one would be safer (although less efficient). I have to comment that it really depends on how you decide to setup your FI-WARE Instance: * You may decide that your application will be hosted in a dedicated FI-WARE Instance. Therefore, there is no risk that third-party applications can access information gathered by your application. As such, there is nothing that prevents you to set up your own FI-WARE Instance hosting the multimedia analysis GE, together with the DB of faces, and your own application in a safe way. Again, the point is that this would be up to you. Note that, in addition, you would be able to setup the Security Monitoring GE in that FI-WARE instance, which may help you to monitor and handle any security attack that you may receive. But this would go in addition. * A slight variation of the previous configuration would be that of keeping your application in a shared FI-WARE Instance supporting Cloud Hosting capabilities, then configuring your virtual hosting infrastructure so that resources (computing, storage, network) are not shared with those from other applications (in other words, you setup your own VDC, and establish a number of RA-SLOs establishing restrictions such as your software/data is never going to run on a server node where third party applications may be co-located to run). Of course, this option is more risky than the previous, because the more isolated your resources are, the safer. But should be safe anyway. And again, the point is that this would be up to you. Same comment regarding benefits of the Security monitoring capabilities would apply here. The second solution would probably be the best one if you decide to run the multimedia analysis GE in a FI-WARE Instance and you don't want to setup restriction on whether your application can be reallocated together with those from others. In this solution, you have decided to adopt a design decision that allows to take advantage of sharing resources in a FI-WARE Instance, but still be safe. Again, it is up to you to go for this option and FI-WARE should not preclude you to do that. 3. Bottom-line: There are many decisions that you should leave on the hands of application provider or the application developer when you design a general-purpose platform. Otherwise, you are doing things wrong and you are going to fail. We have tried to follow this principle as much as possible, not only in the design of GEs and the Reference Architecture of each of the FI-WARE chapters but also introducing the concept of FI-WARE Instances that can be federated (or not, depends on the decision of a particular FI-WARE Instance Provider). That's why there is no concept of single, universal FI-WARE Instance (like google.com) where all Future Internet applications would be hosted. The ability to create dedicated FI-WARE Instances, and even use multiple FI-WARE chapter instances, where some might be shared while others won't in a kind of hybrid solution, brings the greatest flexibility to be able to cope with the needs of almost all applications. Needs that we cannot predict in advance. We may have decided that all data/context elements interchanged through the Publish/Subscribe Broker GE or processed through the Complex Event Processing GE should comply to a particular XML document format we may dictate a standard in FI-WARE. That had made our lifes easier at the implementation phase as you may imagine. But this had been a wrong decission because many applications wish to be free to decide what concrete format to use. Therefore, we decided that data/context elements can follow any format a given application may decide to adopt and that the Data/Context Management GEs should be able to cope with any of them, without this meaning that you pay a performance penalty. This is the kind of design decisions we believe we also have to adopt at the level of GEs, in addition to the principles about FI-WARE Instances and federation of FI-WARE Instances. BTW, I'm almost positive that the Complex Event Processing or the Publish/Subscribe Broker GEs are some of the GEs that would be rather useful for the kind of applications you need to design in Safecity (and I'm almost positive that they will be useful for most of the UC projects because they are truly generic). I guess you will have to deal with events and the need to process them or broadcast them to target applications or users. I would like to learn why you find the multimedia analysis GE useful but not these other two. UC projects should provide a rationale why they plan to use a specific enabler in those cases there is a GE provided by FI-WARE that already serves their needs. Otherwise, this would go against the spirit of the FI-PPP program. Best regards, -- Juanjo On 26/07/11 11:01, Peretz Gurel wrote: Dear FI-PPP AB partners, The attached short document is an initial feedback (at a high level) by SafeCity about the FI-WARE High Level Description document that was presented during the last FI-PPP AB meeting on July 11-12 in Madrid. We have already raised these concerns during the meeting. After the FI-PPP AB meeting we met with one of SafeCity end users (Madrid Police) and they have confirmed the concerns we had. The attached document is not replacing SafeCity requirements for Generic Enablers that will be provided in the required backlog format in due time. However, it is very important for us to understand the direction that FI-WARE is taking, particularly in regard to communications and security, as this has direct impact on SafeCity. Best regards, Peretz Gurel and Roberto Gavazzi SafeCity ________________________________ 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: Safecity feedback V1.doc Type: application/msword Size: 3558400 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: jhierro.vcf Type: text/x-vcard Size: 429 bytes Desc: not available URL: From jhierro at tid.es Thu Jul 28 08:21:46 2011 From: jhierro at tid.es (Juanjo Hierro) Date: Thu, 28 Jul 2011 08:21:46 +0200 Subject: [Fiware-wpl] Activities dealing with development of contents of the FI-WARE website Message-ID: <4E30FFFA.9000207@tid.es> Hi all, Continuing with the activities we have to start, once we produced the FI-WARE High-level Description (Product Vision): 1. Launch of activities dealing with final decision on assets and the creation of the FI-WARE backlog 2. Management of relationship with FI-PPP UC projects 3. Launch of activities dealing with development of contents of the FI-WARE website (setup of the public Wiki and start of activities in blogs) This email elaborates on the third points. We will also review this in the confcall we have scheduled for July 28, 11:30am Cheers, -- Juanjo 3. Activities dealing with development of contents of the FI-WARE website 3.1 Public Wiki We have setup a public Wiki associated to the FI-WARE project. One of our main goals during August will be to populate this Wiki with contents. This will be based on Wikimedia and will be accessible from the FI-WARE website. The intention is that the Wiki will be integrated in FusionForge because that way we will take advantage of the single sign-on functionality that FusionForge offers. Unfortunately, this is taking more time than expected, so we have decided to follow the next steps: 1. Setup a standalone public Wikimedia Wiki on http://wiki.fi-ware.eu with a number of special accounts. 2. Populate the public Wiki with contents, using the special user accounts for this purpose. In parallel, we will continue with the installation of a public Wikimedia Wiki in FusionForge 3. Once we have a public Wikimedia Wiki in FusionForge, we will migrate the contents from the standalone Wiki to the Wiki linked to FusionForge 4. Give editorial access to the rest of the members of the project through their accounts in FusionForge Point 1 has been done. Users and Passwords will be sent to you in separate email. Regarding point 2: * The general Table of Contents of the FI-WARE Wiki is still to be defined but will contain items for the Product Vision and a FAQ. * We will translate contents of the FI-WARE High-level Description (Product Vision) document into the public Wiki. We are currently exploring whether this step can be automated/semi-automated or whether we will have to distribute the tasks among the different chapter teams (using the special accounts that have been setup). 3.2 Blogs We will start populating the blogs. Still we have to close the new design, which will come with an update of the Wordpress underlying platform. This should be ready mid next week. Each WP team will be asked to develop a number of posts on their corresponding chapter blogs: * WPL to generate a posts providing a report on work so far, announcing delivery of the Product Vision and providing link to the corresponding chapter in the Wiki, elaborating on those points that he believes are more relevant. * We recommend to write down a poston each item listed in the Question Marks section. * Academic partners should start writing a post on state of the art for some part of the chapter (remind that we wanted to have on post every month) * Posts dealing with announcements of events (e.g., ServiceWave), workshops, etc. are welcome * Other requests for specific posts will be made during August. 3.3 Twitter We already have an account on twitter (user account "fiware"). It is highly recommended that you join twitter and register as follower of this account. Specific instructions will follow next week regarding posting in this twitter account. We may discuss what to do during our confcall. ________________________________ 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: jhierro.vcf Type: text/x-vcard Size: 429 bytes Desc: not available URL: From jhierro at tid.es Thu Jul 28 11:34:46 2011 From: jhierro at tid.es (Juanjo Hierro) Date: Thu, 28 Jul 2011 11:34:46 +0200 Subject: [Fiware-wpl] Webex details (in case it is needed) Message-ID: <4E312D36.3090605@tid.es> Webex details -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Meeting invitation: FI-WARE WPLs/WPAs meeting Date: Thu, 28 Jul 2011 08:26:01 +0200 From: Gestor i-Reunion webex6100 Reply-To: Webex6100 at tid.es To: JUAN JOSE HIERRO SUREDA Hello , Gestor i-Reunion webex6100 invites you to attend this online meeting. Topic: FI-WARE WPLs/WPAs meeting Date: Thursday, 28 July 2011 Time: 11:30, Europe Summer Time (Paris, GMT+02:00) Meeting Number: 962 861 817 Meeting Password: 1234abcD ------------------------------------------------------- To join the online meeting (Now from iPhones too!) ------------------------------------------------------- 1. Go to https://telefonica.webex.com/telefonica-en/j.php?ED=181326347&UID=1247430077&PW=NMGE1N2FhNzVh&RT=MTgjMjM%3D 2. Enter your name and email address. 3. Enter the meeting password: 1234abcD 4. Click "Join Now". To view in other time zones or languages, please click the link: https://telefonica.webex.com/telefonica-en/j.php?ED=181326347&UID=1247430077&PW=NMGE1N2FhNzVh&ORT=MTgjMjM%3D ------------------------------------------------------- For assistance ------------------------------------------------------- 1. Go to https://telefonica.webex.com/telefonica-en/mc 2. On the left navigation bar, click "Support". You can contact me at: Webex6100 at tid.es To add this meeting to your calendar program (for example Microsoft Outlook), click this link: https://telefonica.webex.com/telefonica-en/j.php?ED=181326347&UID=1247430077&ICS=MI&LD=1&RD=18&ST=1&SHA2=rdusmA2oZKWuN4qc3hIxTT9epZ91YLreYmKfvD0V-5U=&RT=MTgjMjM%3D The playback of UCF (Universal Communications Format) rich media files requires appropriate players. To view this type of rich media files in the meeting, please check whether you have the players installed on your computer by going to https://telefonica.webex.com/telefonica-en/systemdiagnosis.php Sign up for a free trial of WebEx http://www.webex.com/go/mcemfreetrial http://www.webex.com IMPORTANT NOTICE: This WebEx service includes a feature that allows audio and any documents and other materials exchanged or viewed during the session to be recorded. By joining this session, you automatically consent to such recordings. If you do not consent to the recording, do not join the session. ________________________________ 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: jhierro.vcf Type: text/x-vcard Size: 429 bytes Desc: not available URL: From matteo.melideo at eng.it Fri Jul 29 00:11:19 2011 From: matteo.melideo at eng.it (Matteo Melideo) Date: Fri, 29 Jul 2011 00:11:19 +0200 Subject: [Fiware-wpl] Fwd: WP9 FI-WARE DevComE deliverable Message-ID: <4E31DE87.4050807@eng.it> Sorry for spamming you but due to mails problems I forward you again this mail. Thanks again for the cooperation. Best regards, Matteo Melideo -------- Original Message -------- Subject: WP9 FI-WARE DevComE deliverable Date: Tue, 26 Jul 2011 10:55:30 +0200 From: Matteo Melideo Reply-To: matteo.melideo at eng.it Organization: Engineering Ingegneria Informatica S.p.A. To: FI-WARE WPL CC: Juanjo Hierro , stefano de panfilis , Dalle Carbonare Davide Dear Wp Leaders, in Wp9 we have produced the first version of FI-WARE DevComE Technical description v1.0. The document is still under the revision of the PCC but we think it is important to circulate this document anyway to collect as much feedbacks\comments as possible before the plenary in Turin and, if possible, arrange also some conference calls with you. In this respect, it would be really helpful for us to have a contact point from each Work package acting as interface with the Wp9 and available for a short interview. Sorry for bothering you with an additional document to read but this is very short (and probably enjoyable :-) ) and we consider your feedbacks extremely important for the future developments. Thanks in advance and best regards, Matteo Melideo -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: FI-WARE DevComE Technical description v1.0.pdf Type: application/applefile Size: 1674982 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: matteo_melideo.vcf Type: text/x-vcard Size: 354 bytes Desc: not available URL: From jhierro at tid.es Fri Jul 29 11:48:34 2011 From: jhierro at tid.es (Juanjo Hierro) Date: Fri, 29 Jul 2011 11:48:34 +0200 Subject: [Fiware-wpl] VERY IMPORTANT (updated): Coordination of FI-WARE backlog related activities Message-ID: <4E3281F2.1000602@tid.es> Hi all, I pass you another copy of the original message which I have updated to capture the response of to some of the valuable comments you have made during the confcall this morning. This way, we have a single source were hints about how to face next steps are described. I have added also the remark on what should be registered in the backlog (not entries describing what a current asset may already provide but rather "work to be done") Please don't hesitate to ask any question you may have. This is a process that we are about to launch and it is important that we launch it the right way. Thanks and best regards, -- Juanjo -------- Original Message -------- Subject: [Fiware-wpl] VERY IMPORTANT: Coordination of FI-WARE backlog related activities Date: Thu, 28 Jul 2011 03:24:44 +0200 From: Juanjo Hierro To: fiware-wpl at lists.fi-ware.eu , fiware-wpa at lists.fi-ware.eu Hi all, Once we have dealt with the FI-WARE High-level Description (Product Vision) we have to start working in three major tasks on which we should concentrate our efforts until our plenary meeting in Turin: 1. Launch of activities dealing with final decision on assets and the creation of the FI-WARE backlog 2. Management of relationship with FI-PPP UC projects 3. Launch of activities dealing with development of contents of the FI-WARE website (setup of the public Wiki and start of activities in blogs) This email elaborates on the first two points. We will review this in the confcall we have scheduled for July 28, 11:30am Cheers, -- Juanjo 1. Launch of activities dealing with final decision on assets and the creation of the FI-WARE backlog At this point, I assume that you already understand the basis of how we plan to use Agile in our project. It summary, we will use it for managing the FI-WARE requirements, which will take the form of entries in what we refer as the FI-WARE backlog. In any case, please review the presentation I made during our kick-off meeting in May: https://forge.fi-ware.eu/docman/view.php/7/37/FI-WARE+agile+Intro+vfinal.pptx Following is the list of steps and considerations to take into account when launching the activities dealing with final decision on assets and the creation of the FI-WARE backlog: * The first step we have to deal with has to do with closing the decision on the assets we will adopt as baseline for the reference implementation of each of the GEs. For this, every WP will have to come with a first proposal by August 31st on what asset, from what project+partner, will be adopted as baseline for the reference implementation of each of the GEs in the corresponding chapter. The different WP/chapter teams have to start this exercise now. It may not be feasible to close the mapping of assets for each of the GEs identified in a given chapter. This may be particularly the case for assets related to GEs for which there are still may points under discussion. It may also happen that we have identified assets for some of the components of a GE but not all. But at least we should have a relatively mature list of assets identified for the main GEs in each chapter by August 31st. This represents a first action point on WPLs and WPAs. * There are some special cases in which we have a GE but two "competing" assets. Unless the contributing partners agree to carry out a joint development (open source or not), the number of GEs where this happens may allow us to make exceptions and allow two alternative reference implementations for the same GE (this instead of artificially trying to merge both). Of course, we have to work so that the two assets end up supporting the corresponding GE open specifications (APIs, protocols, visible behaviour) which should be only one. We also have to be able to provide enough rationale for this decission (e.g., reference implementations rely on different persistence technology or the combination of the two is what may allow an application provider to setup the most efficient solution in some large-scale, highly distributed architectures. We have to be very careful and analyze each of the cases where we will allow alternative reference implementations. These should be exceptions. Currently, the only one clearly identified is the Publish/Subscribe Broker GE, where two reference implementations (one from Orange, another from TI) will be developed. It has been pointed out that some of these exceptions may be found in the IoT chapter but we have to carefully analyze them and provide the rationale (here, I would add that we also have to find the way to reach the necessary alignment with APIs specified in the Data/Context Management chapter. * Once assets have been identified (for some of the GEs, this decision may be taken right now) we have to start to populate the FI-WARE backlog. * The fields for entries in the FI-PPP backlog (which includes the FI-WARE backlog) have already been defined and correspond to the ones described in the attached template (spreadsheet). Note that entries in the FI-PPP backlog will not comprise just features/user-stories linked to FI-WARE GEs but to other platform enablers which may happen to be common to several applications while still domain-specific. It will also comprise the backlogs of some of the UC projects, associated to their actual application development project, but only for those UC projects that have agreed to follow Agile. If you have any question/doubt regarding semantics of any field in the template, please let Thomas or me know. * Regarding tools to create, maintain and manage requests on entries of the FI-PPP backlog, the following has been agreed: * The FI-PPP will use Agilefant in order to perform the overall management of entries in backlogs. The FI-PPP will go for a configuration where we will define multiple backlogs in Agilefant. One per GE in each chapter, one covering entries for all the still uncategorized platform enablers, one (at least) for other platform enablers that are common but domain-specific (therefore out of the scope of FI-WARE) and one per each of the UC projects that wish to use Agilefant to manage their own application backlog (not all). This with the ability to transfer entries from one backlog to another. * However, Agilefant is pretty simple, and entries of a backlog in Agilefant cannot be flexibly configured as to contain all of the fields we have defined for the FI-PPP backlog template (attached). Therefore, the description field of each entry in an Agilefant backlog will have to include an URL link to a page on a Wiki (based on Wikimedia) where all fields for that entry, as defined in the attached spreadsheet, can be fully specified. Regarding entries linked to the FI-WARE backlogs, and probably also for entries linked to platform enablers in general, this wiki will be provided by FI-WARE. ATOS, Thomas and me will work on defining the process and instructions on how to create backlog entries in the Wiki and in Agilefant before Thursday next week. In the meantime, you may wish to start working on entries, just using spreadsheets following the attached template. * FI-WARE will put in place some system to manage the lifecycle of requests to create new entries in the FI-WARE backlogs or modify existing ones by third parties. This tool should not be offered just to UC projects but to the general public, because we have to be open to other communities. Most probably this tool will be the tracker system in FusionForge but we are still analyzing whether it could be managed directly through Agilefant, defining an intermediate backlog about "request for platform enablers" where request for entries formulated by UC projects would be created and only transferred to the FI-WARE backlogs when agreed with FI-WARE. However, the issue of dealing with other third parties/communities may lead to the need to put a more formal system such as tracker. ATOS, Thomas and me will work on this matter during the following days and will inform you before Thursday next week about what tool has been decided and what will be the procedures to follow. * One point that was already understood and agreed during the FI-PPP AB is that requirements from end-users on applications to be developed by UC projects are different from requirements on FI-WARE (on platform enablers in general). During investigation of a end-user requirement "X" (no matter if it is a Theme, an EPIC or an user-story), a given UC project may conclude that it needs to rely on a platform that support a number of features "a", "b", and "c" plus develop an application implementing functionalities "M", "N", "O" on top of that platform. These "a", "b" and "c" features should translate into entries initially linked to the "platform enablers" backlog. Some of them will finally be addressed in FI-WARE so therefore will be transferred to the FI-WARE backlog. Whether we will manage this transference directly on Agilefant or through a tracker system, is something to decide. Nevertheless, note that specification of "X", "M", "N", "O" will not be part of the FI-WARE backlog. The level of concreteness is also different: "X" and even "M", "N" and "O" may be very concrete, with a quite detailed specification. However, "a", "b" and "c", at the time they are formulated by a UC project, may be just in the form of a "theme" or "epic", according to Agile terminology. * Entries in backlog should evolve from Themes, to EPICS up to user-stories. Following remarks apply: * The frontiers between Themes and EPICs use to be diffuse, they correspond to description of features at different levels of granularity. However, what is important is that user-stories provides all the details of WHAT has to be done that a development team need to know to perform their development work. Themes and EPICs matches different stages of approximation during the interaction process you have to perform until you end up having well detailed user-stories. Note that when refining an EPIC, you may end up having it split into several finer-grain EPICs, but still EPICs. You may also end up having it split into several finer-grain EPICs and some user-stories (covering part of the original EPIC) * When planning a given sprint in Agile, only highest priority user-stories are considered. Themes and EPICs obviously not. This is because, at a given sprint, you only work on what can be done (get finished) by the end of the sprint. This means that if we have a MUST Theme or EPIC, it will never be developed before a COULD user-story. Themes and EPICs simply cannot be done (because development teams do not have all the info they need to implement them). * At a given point in time, features "a", "b" and "c" will be submitted to FI-WARE for consideration. This means they will first be submitted to the "platform enablers" backlog. FI-WARE will then determine whether the feature can be considered inside the scope of FI-WARE and what priority is finally assigned. This decision will most probably imply several interactions with the UC projects that have identified the features. As mentioned before, we will come in the coming days with a concrete proposal on tools and procedures adopted for managing this process. * Parallel to this process, UC projects may additionally require further clarifications about what we intend to deliver in a given chapter, for a given GE. In other words, they may ask for clarifications on parts of the FI-WARE High-level Description (Product Vision). This should be driven in a formal manner, to avoid getting into chaos. Therefore, a specific tracker system associated to the High-level Description (Product Vision) will be put in place for UC projects to formulate their questions. Explanations given to resolve tickets should lead to creation/update of contents in a FAQ Wiki we should start creating. This system will be also offered later to the general public, * Parallel to UC projects running the process described above, FI-WARE should, own its own, work in defining entries for the FI-WARE backlogs. Whether they will be still generic ("themes" or "epics") or already detailed user-stories ready for implementation will depend on how clear we have things regarding the GEs in each of the chapters. There are three different types of entries that FI-WARE chapter teams should be able to generate from now until the Turing meeting (as a first milestone) * Entries related to new functional or non-functional features we need to implement in an asset adopted as baseline for the development of the reference implementation of a given GE (or part of it), in order to cover the gap between what that given asset supports at the time it is contributed by a given partner to the project and what it should support to actually become (part of) a reference implementation of the given GE. This will map to features we want to support during lifetime of FI-WARE. They should have a MUST or SHOULD MoSCoW priority assigned. * Entries related to new functional or non-functional features we wish to implement in an asset adopted as baseline for the development of the reference implementation of a given GE (or part of it), in order to further evolve it and therefore, evolve the corresponding GE (since GEs specifications may evolve over time and offer different functionality in subsequent releases of FI-WARE). This will map to features we may not support during lifetime of FI-WARE, for sure won't fit in the first release. They should have a SHOULD or COULD MoSCoW priority assigned. * Entries related to integration of assets, in those cases where an asset has to be combined with other assets to build the reference implementation of a given GE. Note that these entries are different than those ones related to implementing interfaces/protocols, etc in an asset implementing (part of) a GE, in order to support integration with another GE, because interfaces/protocols enabling integration of GEs should be part of their open specifications and, therefore, should be considered a particular case of points 1. or 2. A very IMPORTANT note: entries in the backlog should not describe what the assets adopted as baseline already provide, but what must, should, could be developed in those assets (see MoSCoW priority field in the attached template for FI-WARE backlog entries). A reminder about semantics linked to MoSCoW priorities: * MUST - Features that absolutely have to be done are categorized as Must. If any of these features are not done, the project will be considered a failure. * SHOULD - Features that are important to the success of the project, but are not absolute musts (they have a workaround or will not cause the project to fail) are categorized as Should * COULD - Features that are nice to have but are not core features are categorized as Could. * WON?T - Features that are not going to be implemented this time are marked as Wont. Remember that entries in the backlog are about "work to be done". User stories are, besides (and this distinguish them from themes and epics) work that is well-defined/detailed enough as to able to be done. Sometimes, it will be appropriate to create an user-story related to the specification of the API (or part of the API) that a given GE will have to provide and differentiate it from implementation (support) of some of the operations of that API, once it has been specified. * Note, that regarding a given feature request, there will be essentially five scenarios: * The feature applies to some of the GEs we have already identified in the FI-WARE High-level Description, and for which an asset has already been identified (therefore we have already identified entries for it in the FI-WARE backlog) * The feature applies to some of the GEs we have already identified in the FI-WARE High-level Description, but for which an asset hasn't already been identified (it is a gap we have already identified that none of the partners in FI-WARE is able to fill contributing an asset) * The feature applies to some GE we hadn't identified initially in FI-WARE (in the FI-WARE High-level Description) but we agree to incorporate it in the roadmap, despite no partner has an asset that can be contributed as baseline for development of a reference implementation * The feature applies to some GE we hadn't identified initially in FI-WARE (in the FI-WARE High-level Description) but we agree to incorporate it, and there is a partner that has an asset that may be contributed as baseline for development of a reference implementation * The feature applies to some enabler we hadn't identified initially in FI-WARE and we don't agree to accept it as GE since it is a common, yet domain-specific, platform enabler, but not a GE The first case will lead to negotiation of priorities between us and the UC project. The second and third case will lead to requirements that we should take into account in our Open Calls. The fourth case require careful consideration because we won't be able to change the assignment of resources to a given partner. We need to calibrate whether the partner can adjust its efforts to deal with more GEs that the originally planned (maybe addressing less new functionality in each) or we should finally issue an Open Call for the GE being considered. * Despite the most active UC projects may start creating some initial requests for entries in the FI-WARE backlog during August, I do not expect so much activity, so keep going on your own, generating entries in the FI-WARE backlogs based on the principles of the previous point. During September negotiations with UC projects should become more intense. We indeed agreed with the UC projects to have a milestone by end of September in which we should already have produced a number of entries in the FI-WARE backlogs on our own, and they should have been produced some requests for entries in our FI-WARE backlogs. A period of negotiation/consolidation is then planned, which should end by end of November, with the first official release of the FI-WARE backlog to be considered for the first release of FI-WARE and also a clear definition of what we are going to request in the first Open Call of FI-WARE * Some people have asked to me what should we do regarding the the second release of the FI-WARE High-level Description (Product Vision). We will transfer contents of the first official release of the FI-WARE High-level Description (Product Vision) to the public Wiki at the website. From then on, we will work making updates on the Wiki, so we will get rid of editing MS Word documents, etc. Therefore, delivery of the second release of the Product Vision will consist essentially in ... passing an URL. Note that major changes will be incremental, located in very concrete places and delivered in a "continuous". The type of changes that I would expect would distinguish the second release compared to the first one are the following: * we should include a dedicated section per GE elaborating on the asset selected as baseline, which mostly will contain links to existing documentation which explains what the asset already provides today (user's/programmers guide, etc, whatever valuable documentation is available). This mostly what is going to be new in this "second release" (despite talking about releases would not make sense any more ... we will work in a continuous) * we will probably need to update/add some content as a result of tackling some of the "topics still under discussion" ________________________________ 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: Backlog entries description v0 1 11-07-12.xls Type: application/vnd.ms-excel Size: 52224 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: jhierro.vcf Type: text/x-vcard Size: 429 bytes Desc: not available URL: From matteo.melideo at eng.it Fri Jul 29 14:39:43 2011 From: matteo.melideo at eng.it (Matteo Melideo) Date: Fri, 29 Jul 2011 14:39:43 +0200 Subject: [Fiware-wpl] WP9 FI-WARE DevComE deliverable Message-ID: <4E32AA0F.2040307@eng.it> Dear Wp Leaders, in Wp9 we have produced the first version of FI-WARE DevComE Technical description v1.0. The document has to be aligned to the Product Vision, so partners (and Juanjo) are entitled to provide their comments if they feel like there is something which doesn't align from their point of view. Anyway we think it is important to circulate this document to collect as much feedbacks\comments as possible before the plenary in Turin and, if possible, arrange also some conference calls with you. In this respect, it would be really helpful for us to have a contact point from each Work package acting as interface with the Wp9 and available for a short interview. Sorry for bothering you with an additional document to read but this is very short (and probably enjoyable :-) ) and we consider your feedbacks extremely important for the future developments. Thanks in advance and best regards, Matteo Melideo -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: FI-WARE DevComE Technical description v1.0.doc Type: application/msword Size: 1237504 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: matteo_melideo.vcf Type: text/x-vcard Size: 354 bytes Desc: not available URL: