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

[Juanjo Hierro]

Hi Thierry,

  Thanks for your comments.   I would like to provide my personal view on some of the matters you have raised in your email but I won't be able until later today, probably this evening due to another commitments.

  Nevertheless, one thing I would like to clarify is that most of the activities described in the DoW for WP2 are the kind of activities we all of us are supposed to carry out through discussion on the fiware-wpl and fiware-wpa mailing lists as well as the joint WPLs/WPAs confcalls.     So putting WP2 "at work" should translate into improving interaction and participation through the fiware-wpl and fiware-wpa mailing lists, as well as the joint WPLs/WPAs follow-up confcalls.     It's not a matter of creating a dedicated WP2 working group or a fiware-wp2 mailing list but really improve response and involvement in the fiware-wpl/wpa mailing lists as well as the joint WPLs/WPAs follow-up confcalls.

  As an example, I have seen requests for contribution from the Testbed WP Leaders or the Exploitation WP Leaders sent on the list, multiple times, even reinforced with reminders through consecutive joint WPLs/WPAs follow-up confcalls, that have simply been ignored.   If response and interaction had been better, most probably we would be on a better position regarding some deliverables.

  I'm happy to discuss about that and, of course, all constructive feedback is welcome.   We can make this point a point of the agenda of our joint WPL/WPA follow-up confcall on Monday.

  Best regards,

-- Juanjo




On 04/05/12 10:27, thierry.nagellen at orange.com<mailto:thierry.nagellen at orange.com> wrote:
Dear all,

I would raise here a main concern regarding how we are managing our deliverables. Basically and since the beginning of the project we are late for all deliverables and it will be a strong concern for our Project Officer and our reviewers in less than 2 months during the review.

We can split our deliverables into 2 categories: technical deliverables where all technical chapters have to provide their own content, and classical deliverables directly related to a dedicated WP.

For the technical deliverables, my feeling and the feedback from IoT team is that we never have the ToC on time, which is normally 2 months before to deliver the final version, and when we have the ToC, guidelines are always moving especially during the last 2 weeks because the technical chapters did not really apply the guidelines (or because we are not able to manage correctly the consistency between chapters). In the case of these technical deliverables, the rule we apply is that Telefonica is the Editor because Telefonica is the chief architect. My main question here is: what is the role of WP2 till the beginning of the project? Could we use this place to prepare and discuss the ToC together in this place and maintain it or just small changes to avoid writing something in a rush at the last minute?
We could also define the GANTT with the expected deliverables and when the ToC should be ready.

For the classical deliverables, there are not managed as a first priority till now and we have the same concern regarding the ToC definition and who is responsible of what. Very often the only names put in a deliverable are WP Leader or WP Architect and each technical team has to manage partner’s contribution. When the same partners are involved in several WPs, it is very difficult to coordinate contributions and at the end to reach a good quality for the deliverable. What should be clearly stated is that if the skeleton of the deliverable is moving, the editor is responsible to adapt previous contribution to the new framework and not to ask 70 people to do the same work twice or three times.

For both categories of deliverables, wiki format is for me not the right format to have working document. To track changes or to put right formats take too much time especially when we change the skeleton. Furthermore, we have no clear rules first for the private deliverables how they will be published on the wiki (I’ve sent a previous email on this subject for exploitation deliverable but did not receive any answer) and how the existing public information is managed and by whom to introduce some changes.

I think all these points are also of my responsibility as WP leader because we spend too much time to write several times the same content in different ways, we are late for all deliverables and we create lots of noise around technical tasks and middleware we have to deliver. We will have to explain all these points to the Commission in 2 months so we have to identify solutions and be able to improve our project management to avoid any crisis with the Commission.

I’m opened for any suggestions but my first proposals are the following:

·         Organize WP2 meetings to define ToC and guidelines for technical deliverables

·         Provide a GANTT for all further deliverables

·         Use mainly word document to be able to track easily all changes and for private deliverables

·         Based on the ToC allow responsibilities to editor and main contributors

Best regards.
Thierry Nagellen
Program Manager Future Internet
Orange Labs Networks & Carriers
905 rue Albert Einstein
06921 Sophia Antipolis Cedex
+33 492 94 52 84
+33 679 85 08 44
New email address: thierry.nagellen at orange.com<mailto:thierry.nagellen at orange.com>


________________________________

Este mensaje se dirige exclusivamente a su destinatario. Puede consultar nuestra política de envío y recepción de correo electrónico en el enlace situado más abajo.
This message is intended exclusively for its addressee. We only send and receive email on the basis of the terms set out at.
http://www.tid.es/ES/PAGINAS/disclaimer.aspx
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.fiware.org/private/fiware-wpl/attachments/20120504/3eb5ef87/attachment.html>