[Fiware-data] Fwd: Fwd: Description of entries in the FI-PPP backlog

[Juanjo Hierro]

-------- Original Message --------
Subject:        Fwd: Description of entries in the FI-PPP backlog
Date:   Fri, 08 Jul 2011 07:59:37 +0200
From:   Juanjo Hierro <jhierro at tid.es><mailto:jhierro at tid.es>
To:     fiware-wpl at lists.fi-ware.eu<mailto:fiware-wpl at lists.fi-ware.eu> <fiware-wpl at lists.fi-ware.eu><mailto:fiware-wpl at lists.fi-ware.eu>, fiware-wpa at lists.fi-ware.eu<mailto:fiware-wpa at lists.fi-ware.eu> <fiware-wpa at lists.fi-ware.eu><mailto:fiware-wpa at lists.fi-ware.eu>


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 <jhierro at tid.es><mailto:jhierro at tid.es>
To:     ab at fi-ppp.eu<mailto:ab at fi-ppp.eu> <ab at fi-ppp.eu><mailto: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 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/old-fiware-data/attachments/20110708/6af09b56/attachment.html>
-------------- 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: <https://lists.fiware.org/private/old-fiware-data/attachments/20110708/6af09b56/attachment.xlsx>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: jhierro.vcf
Type: text/x-vcard
Size: 429 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.fiware.org/private/old-fiware-data/attachments/20110708/6af09b56/attachment.vcf>