From GLIKSON at il.ibm.com Fri Jul 1 18:30:10 2011 From: GLIKSON at il.ibm.com (Alex Glikson) Date: Fri, 1 Jul 2011 19:30:10 +0300 Subject: [Fiware-cloud] HLDesc Message-ID: A version of the document with Juanjo's comments (on most of the sections) can be found on Forge. Please, review and send me your thoughts. I will be working on addressing Juanjo's (and your) comments and integrating responses on Sunday. Regards, Alex -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From GLIKSON at il.ibm.com Mon Jul 4 11:29:03 2011 From: GLIKSON at il.ibm.com (Alex Glikson) Date: Mon, 4 Jul 2011 12:29:03 +0300 Subject: [Fiware-cloud] HLDesc In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: The latest version is available in Forge ( https://forge.fi-ware.eu/docman/admin/index.php?editdoc=1&docid=107&group_id=7 , use the link in "File" section). This version includes various editorial updates (mostly based on Juanjo's suggestions), as well as few structural changes (e.g., merged the "interfaces" and "SLOs" sections into individual GEs). Your comments are welcome. Thanks, Alex From: Alex Glikson/Haifa/IBM at IBMIL To: fiware-cloud at lists.fi-ware.eu Date: 01/07/2011 07:30 PM Subject: [Fiware-cloud] HLDesc Sent by: fiware-cloud-bounces at lists.fi-ware.eu A version of the document with Juanjo's comments (on most of the sections) can be found on Forge. Please, review and send me your thoughts. I will be working on addressing Juanjo's (and your) comments and integrating responses on Sunday. Regards, Alex _______________________________________________ Fiware-cloud mailing list Fiware-cloud at lists.fi-ware.eu http://lists.fi-ware.eu/listinfo/fiware-cloud -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From GLIKSON at il.ibm.com Mon Jul 4 17:38:48 2011 From: GLIKSON at il.ibm.com (Alex Glikson) Date: Mon, 4 Jul 2011 18:38:48 +0300 Subject: [Fiware-cloud] today's meeting In-Reply-To: References: <453EEB4CD4162742B6EF3D3F84E88A6E8FE7D294@MOPESMBX01.eu.thmulti.com> Message-ID: I apologize - I was not able to able to make it. The only topic on the agenda is the HLDesc. If you have any comments -- please, send them to the mailing list. Regards, Alex From: Irena Trajkovska To: "Edmonds, AndrewX" Cc: Defrance Serge , Alex Glikson/Haifa/IBM at IBMIL, "fiware-cloud at lists.fi-ware.eu" Date: 30/06/2011 07:03 PM Subject: Re: [Fiware-cloud] today's meeting It is ok for UPM as well. Irena On Thu, Jun 30, 2011 at 5:55 PM, Edmonds, AndrewX < andrewx.edmonds at intel.com> wrote: 17-18CET is also fine for me. From: Defrance Serge [mailto:serge.defrance at technicolor.com] Sent: Thursday, June 30, 2011 4:47 PM To: Edmonds, AndrewX; Alex Glikson; fiware-cloud at lists.fi-ware.eu Subject: RE: [Fiware-cloud] today's meeting Fine for me too as well as 17-18CET proposed by Fernando. Serge. From: fiware-cloud-bounces at lists.fi-ware.eu [mailto: fiware-cloud-bounces at lists.fi-ware.eu] On Behalf Of Edmonds, AndrewX Sent: jeudi 30 juin 2011 17:37 To: Alex Glikson; fiware-cloud at lists.fi-ware.eu Subject: Re: [Fiware-cloud] today's meeting Fine for me :-) From: fiware-cloud-bounces at lists.fi-ware.eu [mailto: fiware-cloud-bounces at lists.fi-ware.eu] On Behalf Of Alex Glikson Sent: Thursday, June 30, 2011 4:24 PM To: fiware-cloud at lists.fi-ware.eu Subject: Re: [Fiware-cloud] today's meeting Juanjo is going to upload his comments by the end of the day today (hopefully). The deadline for addressing the comments is Monday (when we need to make a snapshot of the document available for PPP partners). I'll try to schedule a meeting on Monday to discuss. How about 11-12 CET? Regards, Alex From: "Edmonds, AndrewX" To: Alex Glikson/Haifa/IBM at IBMIL, "fiware-cloud at lists.fi-ware.eu" < fiware-cloud at lists.fi-ware.eu> Date: 30/06/2011 03:18 PM Subject: RE: [Fiware-cloud] today's meeting Any update on this document? From: fiware-cloud-bounces at lists.fi-ware.eu [ mailto:fiware-cloud-bounces at lists.fi-ware.eu] On Behalf Of Alex Glikson Sent: Tuesday, June 28, 2011 9:12 AM To: fiware-cloud at lists.fi-ware.eu Subject: [Fiware-cloud] today's meeting All, I would like to cancel the conf call scheduled for today. The HLDesc is currently being reviewed & integrated -- we will continue with the meetings once we get specific feedback and/or action items. If there are any other topics to discuss -- please, send an email. Regards, Alex [attachment "smime.p7s" deleted by Alex Glikson/Haifa/IBM] ------------------------------------------------------------- Intel Ireland Limited (Branch) Collinstown Industrial Park, Leixlip, County Kildare, Ireland Registered Number: E902934 This e-mail and any attachments may contain confidential material for the sole use of the intended recipient(s). Any review or distribution by others is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender and delete all copies. ------------------------------------------------------------- Intel Ireland Limited (Branch) Collinstown Industrial Park, Leixlip, County Kildare, Ireland Registered Number: E902934 This e-mail and any attachments may contain confidential material for the sole use of the intended recipient(s). Any review or distribution by others is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender and delete all copies. _______________________________________________ Fiware-cloud mailing list Fiware-cloud at lists.fi-ware.eu http://lists.fi-ware.eu/listinfo/fiware-cloud -- Irena -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From GLIKSON at il.ibm.com Tue Jul 5 11:29:19 2011 From: GLIKSON at il.ibm.com (Alex Glikson) Date: Tue, 5 Jul 2011 12:29:19 +0300 Subject: [Fiware-cloud] Fw: [Fiware-wpl] Update on status of integrated draft Message-ID: FYI, see below the overall status of HLDesc document. If you find any major issues in the current version of the document -- now is the time to speak up :-) Regards, Alex ----- Forwarded by Alex Glikson/Haifa/IBM on 05/07/2011 12:26 PM ----- From: Juanjo Hierro To: "fiware-wpl at lists.fi-ware.eu" , "fiware-wpa at lists.fi-ware.eu" Date: 05/07/2011 11:52 AM Subject: [Fiware-wpl] Update on status of integrated draft Sent by: fiware-wpl-bounces at lists.fi-ware.eu 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[attachment "jhierro.vcf" deleted by Alex Glikson/Haifa/IBM] _______________________________________________ Fiware-wpl mailing list Fiware-wpl at lists.fi-ware.eu http://lists.fi-ware.eu/listinfo/fiware-wpl -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From GLIKSON at il.ibm.com Mon Jul 11 11:35:55 2011 From: GLIKSON at il.ibm.com (Alex Glikson) Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2011 12:35:55 +0300 Subject: [Fiware-cloud] weekly conf call Message-ID: Dear all, Seems that we don't have any urgent topics to discuss during the weekly conf call this week. Please, let me know if you are aware of any open issues. Thanks, Alex -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fla at tid.es Mon Jul 11 11:56:23 2011 From: fla at tid.es (FERNANDO LOPEZ AGUILAR) Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2011 11:56:23 +0200 Subject: [Fiware-cloud] weekly conf call In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <8EE61BA0CAEDBD4E9DA928D1206463D2A185023CF0@EXCLU2K7.hi.inet> Well, I suggest that due to the holiday seasons is coming, we start to prepare the meeting of September. In order that at least the majority of partners will be involve on it. Of course it is only a suggestion. Fernando From: fiware-cloud-bounces at lists.fi-ware.eu [mailto:fiware-cloud-bounces at lists.fi-ware.eu] On Behalf Of Alex Glikson Sent: lunes, 11 de julio de 2011 11:36 To: fiware-cloud at lists.fi-ware.eu Subject: [Fiware-cloud] weekly conf call Dear all, Seems that we don't have any urgent topics to discuss during the weekly conf call this week. Please, let me know if you are aware of any open issues. Thanks, Alex ________________________________ 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 GLIKSON at il.ibm.com Mon Jul 11 13:00:07 2011 From: GLIKSON at il.ibm.com (Alex Glikson) Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2011 14:00:07 +0300 Subject: [Fiware-cloud] weekly conf call In-Reply-To: <8EE61BA0CAEDBD4E9DA928D1206463D2A185023CF0@EXCLU2K7.hi.inet> References: <8EE61BA0CAEDBD4E9DA928D1206463D2A185023CF0@EXCLU2K7.hi.inet> Message-ID: Right.. not only the meeting, but the actual deliverables that we need to provide by the end of September (M5) -- next level of details of each GE, mapping to specific assets, as well as features backlog. And the F2F meeting between September 13-16 would be a good opportunity to finalize whatever open issues we might still have by then. Let's start discussing next week, after we hear from Juanjo regarding the outcomes/conclusions of the PPP AB meeting which takes place this week. Regards, Alex From: FERNANDO LOPEZ AGUILAR To: Alex Glikson/Haifa/IBM at IBMIL, "fiware-cloud at lists.fi-ware.eu" Date: 11/07/2011 12:56 PM Subject: RE: [Fiware-cloud] weekly conf call Well, I suggest that due to the holiday seasons is coming, we start to prepare the meeting of September. In order that at least the majority of partners will be involve on it. Of course it is only a suggestion. Fernando From: fiware-cloud-bounces at lists.fi-ware.eu [ mailto:fiware-cloud-bounces at lists.fi-ware.eu] On Behalf Of Alex Glikson Sent: lunes, 11 de julio de 2011 11:36 To: fiware-cloud at lists.fi-ware.eu Subject: [Fiware-cloud] weekly conf call Dear all, Seems that we don't have any urgent topics to discuss during the weekly conf call this week. Please, let me know if you are aware of any open issues. Thanks, Alex 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 fla at tid.es Mon Jul 11 14:00:14 2011 From: fla at tid.es (FERNANDO LOPEZ AGUILAR) Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2011 14:00:14 +0200 Subject: [Fiware-cloud] weekly conf call In-Reply-To: References: <8EE61BA0CAEDBD4E9DA928D1206463D2A185023CF0@EXCLU2K7.hi.inet> Message-ID: <8EE61BA0CAEDBD4E9DA928D1206463D2A185023D02@EXCLU2K7.hi.inet> What is PPP AB? Advisory Board? From: fiware-cloud-bounces at lists.fi-ware.eu [mailto:fiware-cloud-bounces at lists.fi-ware.eu] On Behalf Of Alex Glikson Sent: lunes, 11 de julio de 2011 13:00 To: fiware-cloud at lists.fi-ware.eu Subject: Re: [Fiware-cloud] weekly conf call Right.. not only the meeting, but the actual deliverables that we need to provide by the end of September (M5) -- next level of details of each GE, mapping to specific assets, as well as features backlog. And the F2F meeting between September 13-16 would be a good opportunity to finalize whatever open issues we might still have by then. Let's start discussing next week, after we hear from Juanjo regarding the outcomes/conclusions of the PPP AB meeting which takes place this week. Regards, Alex From: FERNANDO LOPEZ AGUILAR > To: Alex Glikson/Haifa/IBM at IBMIL, "fiware-cloud at lists.fi-ware.eu" > Date: 11/07/2011 12:56 PM Subject: RE: [Fiware-cloud] weekly conf call ________________________________ Well, I suggest that due to the holiday seasons is coming, we start to prepare the meeting of September. In order that at least the majority of partners will be involve on it. Of course it is only a suggestion. Fernando From: fiware-cloud-bounces at lists.fi-ware.eu [mailto:fiware-cloud-bounces at lists.fi-ware.eu] On Behalf Of Alex Glikson Sent: lunes, 11 de julio de 2011 11:36 To: fiware-cloud at lists.fi-ware.eu Subject: [Fiware-cloud] weekly conf call Dear all, Seems that we don't have any urgent topics to discuss during the weekly conf call this week. Please, let me know if you are aware of any open issues. Thanks, Alex ________________________________ 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: From GLIKSON at il.ibm.com Mon Jul 11 14:05:58 2011 From: GLIKSON at il.ibm.com (Alex Glikson) Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2011 15:05:58 +0300 Subject: [Fiware-cloud] weekly conf call In-Reply-To: <8EE61BA0CAEDBD4E9DA928D1206463D2A185023D02@EXCLU2K7.hi.inet> References: <8EE61BA0CAEDBD4E9DA928D1206463D2A185023CF0@EXCLU2K7.hi.inet> <8EE61BA0CAEDBD4E9DA928D1206463D2A185023D02@EXCLU2K7.hi.inet> Message-ID: Architecture Board From: FERNANDO LOPEZ AGUILAR To: Alex Glikson/Haifa/IBM at IBMIL, "fiware-cloud at lists.fi-ware.eu" Date: 11/07/2011 03:00 PM Subject: RE: [Fiware-cloud] weekly conf call What is PPP AB? Advisory Board? From: fiware-cloud-bounces at lists.fi-ware.eu [ mailto:fiware-cloud-bounces at lists.fi-ware.eu] On Behalf Of Alex Glikson Sent: lunes, 11 de julio de 2011 13:00 To: fiware-cloud at lists.fi-ware.eu Subject: Re: [Fiware-cloud] weekly conf call Right.. not only the meeting, but the actual deliverables that we need to provide by the end of September (M5) -- next level of details of each GE, mapping to specific assets, as well as features backlog. And the F2F meeting between September 13-16 would be a good opportunity to finalize whatever open issues we might still have by then. Let's start discussing next week, after we hear from Juanjo regarding the outcomes/conclusions of the PPP AB meeting which takes place this week. Regards, Alex From: FERNANDO LOPEZ AGUILAR To: Alex Glikson/Haifa/IBM at IBMIL, "fiware-cloud at lists.fi-ware.eu" < fiware-cloud at lists.fi-ware.eu> Date: 11/07/2011 12:56 PM Subject: RE: [Fiware-cloud] weekly conf call Well, I suggest that due to the holiday seasons is coming, we start to prepare the meeting of September. In order that at least the majority of partners will be involve on it. Of course it is only a suggestion. Fernando From: fiware-cloud-bounces at lists.fi-ware.eu [ mailto:fiware-cloud-bounces at lists.fi-ware.eu] On Behalf Of Alex Glikson Sent: lunes, 11 de julio de 2011 11:36 To: fiware-cloud at lists.fi-ware.eu Subject: [Fiware-cloud] weekly conf call Dear all, Seems that we don't have any urgent topics to discuss during the weekly conf call this week. Please, let me know if you are aware of any open issues. Thanks, Alex 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: From GLIKSON at il.ibm.com Mon Jul 18 11:19:30 2011 From: GLIKSON at il.ibm.com (Alex Glikson) Date: Mon, 18 Jul 2011 12:19:30 +0300 Subject: [Fiware-cloud] Fw: [Fiware-wpl] Next steps regarding the FI-WARE High-level Description (Product Vision) Message-ID: FYI, see Juanjo's email below elaborating on the M5 deliverable. Let's resume our periodic conf calls after we get further clarifications regarding the Wiki and the Backlog. Meanwhile, we can exchange by email some thoughts regarding assets applicable to each GE. Regards, Alex ----- Forwarded by Alex Glikson/Haifa/IBM on 18/07/2011 09:27 AM ----- From: Juanjo Hierro To: "fiware-wpl at lists.fi-ware.eu" , "fiware-wpa at lists.fi-ware.eu" Date: 18/07/2011 01:47 AM Subject: [Fiware-wpl] Next steps regarding the FI-WARE High-level Description (Product Vision) Sent by: fiware-wpl-bounces at lists.fi-ware.eu 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[attachment "jhierro.vcf" deleted by Alex Glikson/Haifa/IBM] _______________________________________________ Fiware-wpl mailing list Fiware-wpl at lists.fi-ware.eu http://lists.fi-ware.eu/listinfo/fiware-wpl -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fla at tid.es Mon Jul 18 16:54:25 2011 From: fla at tid.es (FERNANDO LOPEZ AGUILAR) Date: Mon, 18 Jul 2011 16:54:25 +0200 Subject: [Fiware-cloud] Fw: [Fiware-wpl] Next steps regarding the FI-WARE High-level Description (Product Vision) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Dear all, I give a deep review of the last version that I had about our chapter and I can find some typos and mistakes. Please consider them in the version that we want to free tomorrow. Best regards, ________________________________ 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: FI-WARE High-Level Description - Cloud chapter - v1.0 TID.doc Type: application/msword Size: 2233344 bytes Desc: FI-WARE High-Level Description - Cloud chapter - v1.0 TID.doc URL: -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: PastedGraphic-1.tiff Type: image/tiff Size: 66394 bytes Desc: PastedGraphic-1.tiff URL: -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fla at tid.es Mon Jul 18 17:09:03 2011 From: fla at tid.es (FERNANDO LOPEZ AGUILAR) Date: Mon, 18 Jul 2011 17:09:03 +0200 Subject: [Fiware-cloud] Fw: [Fiware-wpl] Next steps regarding the FI-WARE High-level Description (Product Vision) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Dear Alex et all. I read the email from Juanjo and I agree with the comment of Juanjo. I think that it is a interesting solution to continue working in a wiki site. Regarding the identification of the assets and how to integrate them. I think that we can start by email the discussion. Continue with several things like the time schedule before the next meeting, I will be on holidays from 12th August to 5th September. Fernando L?pez Aguilar Cloud Computing fla at tid dot es +34 914 832 729 Telef?nica I+D (R&D) Ronda de la Comunicaci?n s/n Distrito C, Edificio Oeste 1, Planta 5 28050 Madrid, Spain [cid:65E3CA3A-3DFE-41B6-8F69-2AD965EA42FA at hi.inet] El 18/07/2011, a las 11:19, Alex Glikson escribi?: FYI, see Juanjo's email below elaborating on the M5 deliverable. Let's resume our periodic conf calls after we get further clarifications regarding the Wiki and the Backlog. Meanwhile, we can exchange by email some thoughts regarding assets applicable to each GE. Regards, Alex ----- Forwarded by Alex Glikson/Haifa/IBM on 18/07/2011 09:27 AM ----- From: Juanjo Hierro > To: "fiware-wpl at lists.fi-ware.eu" >, "fiware-wpa at lists.fi-ware.eu" > Date: 18/07/2011 01:47 AM Subject: [Fiware-wpl] Next steps regarding the FI-WARE High-level Description (Product Vision) Sent by: fiware-wpl-bounces at lists.fi-ware.eu ________________________________ 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[attachment "jhierro.vcf" deleted by Alex Glikson/Haifa/IBM] _______________________________________________ Fiware-wpl mailing list Fiware-wpl at lists.fi-ware.eu http://lists.fi-ware.eu/listinfo/fiware-wpl ________________________________ 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: PastedGraphic-1.tiff Type: image/tiff Size: 66394 bytes Desc: PastedGraphic-1.tiff URL: From andrewx.edmonds at intel.com Fri Jul 22 11:54:26 2011 From: andrewx.edmonds at intel.com (Edmonds, AndrewX) Date: Fri, 22 Jul 2011 10:54:26 +0100 Subject: [Fiware-cloud] FW: Contrail federation use cases document Message-ID: Those interested in cloud federation may find this document from the Contrail project useful input. Also this article on using standards for an interoperable cloud was published: http://infoq.com/articles/open-interoperable-cloud Andy -----Original Message----- From: dcifed-wg-bounces at ogf.org [mailto:dcifed-wg-bounces at ogf.org] On Behalf Of jens.jensen at stfc.ac.uk Sent: Sunday, July 17, 2011 6:07 PM To: dcifed-wg at ogf.org Subject: [dcifed-wg] Contrail federation use cases document Attached (apologies for sending a 600KB attachment...:-) The deliverable is closed now but I am sure we'd be interested in comments. We also have a D2.2 on federation architecture and how the SLA stuff will work but it's in progress - if you're interested lemme know. Thanks --jens -- Scanned by iCritical. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: d2.1.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 615278 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: smime.p7s Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature Size: 5213 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- ------------------------------------------------------------- Intel Ireland Limited (Branch) Collinstown Industrial Park, Leixlip, County Kildare, Ireland Registered Number: E902934 This e-mail and any attachments may contain confidential material for the sole use of the intended recipient(s). Any review or distribution by others is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender and delete all copies. From randradas at libresoft.es Thu Jul 28 00:28:39 2011 From: randradas at libresoft.es (Roberto Andradas Izquierdo) Date: Thu, 28 Jul 2011 00:28:39 +0200 Subject: [Fiware-cloud] FI-WARE mailing lists are now again operative Message-ID: Dear FI-WARE project members, This mail is to announce you that the FI-WARE mailing lists are now again operative. Nevertheless, we will monitor them tomorrow to make sure there are no incidents with them. Please let us know if you still experience any problem by sending an email to fiware-support at lists.fi-ware.eu Apologize for the inconvenience all this may have caused. Sincerely, The FI-WARE infrastructure support team email: fiware-support at lists.fi-ware.eu From GLIKSON at il.ibm.com Fri Jul 29 21:33:06 2011 From: GLIKSON at il.ibm.com (Alex Glikson) Date: Fri, 29 Jul 2011 22:33:06 +0300 Subject: [Fiware-cloud] Fw: [Fiware-wpl] VERY IMPORTANT (updated): Coordination of FI-WARE backlog related activities Message-ID: All, Please, see below guidelines from Juanjo on managing assets and backlog. We will resume our weekly calls and start discussing this on August, 9th (at our regular slot -- 11am). Please, send *before* that meeting the initial list of assets that you consider for each of the GEs. Regards, Alex ----- Forwarded by Alex Glikson/Haifa/IBM on 29/07/2011 02:47 PM ----- From: Juanjo Hierro 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 point. 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) 1. 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. 2. 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. 3. 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 _______________________________________________ Fiware-wpl mailing list Fiware-wpl at lists.fi-ware.eu http://lists.fi-ware.eu/listinfo/fiware-wpl -------------- 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: application/octet-stream Size: 443 bytes Desc: not available URL: