Dear Andrea,
If you can please be more explicit. I am not in that call nor are the
rest of the testbed list that you are CCing.
BR
Miguel
El 08/04/2013 20:40, Andrea Manieri escribió:
> Dear Miguel,
> Thanks for clarifying further.
>
> A still obscure item was those Juanjo complained about, in the today call, related the last proposed text/effort distribution... That didn't include the new task as agreed.
>
> A
>
>
> Andrea Manieri
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Miguel Carrillo <mcp at tid.es>
> Date: Mon, 08 Apr 2013 19:22:04
> To: Andrea Manieri<manieri at eng.it>
> Cc: JUAN JOSE HIERRO SUREDA<jhierro at tid.es>; JAVIER DE PEDRO SANCHEZ<jdps at tid.es>; stefano de panfilis<stefano.depanfilis at eng.it>; 'Corte Piero'<Piero.Corte at eng.it>; fiware-testbed at lists.fi-ware.eu<fiware-testbed at lists.fi-ware.eu>
> Subject: Re: FI-WARE: Amendment 4 - WP10 (new version required, excel and word)
>
> Dear Andrea,
>
> You CC the whole WP10 so let us clarify to give them the context to the other partners as orderly as we can:
>
> What we will do in Amendment 4 (about to be closed & already consensuated with you)
> - EAB ramaining effort (11MM) and budget is fully trasfered to TID for the time being (we will try to provide the right explanation to the EC). I guess that the partners should not mind whether this goes to TID or ENG as long as is it a pool for future reallocation. TID will try to discuss it with Arian asap and before sending amendment 4 to make sure that there are no further iterations
> - The new task 10.6 description, related to OIL, is not included in this WP10 amendment.
> - A further discussion in the PCC/GA will be about addressing who, when and how will address this topic.
> What we will do in next amendments (to be discussed)
> - We have a draft of 10.6 (wording + contributors) but we suggest to later consensuate it with more calm in WP10
> - The resource distribution is not feasible as we discussed it (we were forced to react too quickly and the rules that we applied in our discussion are not valid). I wish it was so easy...
> In any case and in summary, yes, we need to take out T10.6 of amendment 4 and save it for future amendments. This is subject to whatever surprises we may encounter when we manage to get hold of Arian. Our assumption is that we will come to an arrangement similar to this but let us see.
>
> As regards your message at 14:16 today with subject "Re: [Fiware-testbed] FI-WARE: Amendment 4 - WP10 (new version required, excel and word)", it could be the basis for the contents of amendment 5 (maybe this is what you mean). But as we have insisted when talking between ourselves, the redistribution of work does not fit in the DoW like that. It is not our rules, it's Arian's rules, after 3 amendments we know. And we cannot discuss it at this point, we need to close Amendment 4. Important: I have not agreed to reinclude T10.6 in amendment 4 (we do agree to do it in amendment 5), it would stall the whole amendment if we do it now.
>
> We will report back when we get an answer.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Miguel
>
>
> El 08/04/2013 13:44, Andrea Manieri escribió:
> Dear Juanjo,
>
> sorry to not being able to join the call, especially when requested info from me was expected. I was not aware about.
>
> Anyhow, can you tell me what's exactly is your decision about the EAB effort and the new task 10.6 about OIL?
>
> An initial agreeement about task description and effort allocation/role was achieved among Miguel and myself. Then - from the email below - I understood that you didn't agreed to that and you want to postpone the decision.
>
> I'm checking the various typos spotted by Javier and will soon send an amended version of WP9 and 10. Please tell me if you want me to insert back the 10.6 or leave it out.
>
> best,
>
> A.
>
>
> Il 05/04/2013 12:00, Miguel Carrillo ha scritto:
> Dear Andrea,
>
> I finally managed to talk to Juanjo and also to Javier de Pedro who just showed me the latest internal messages with him.
>
> We were initially working this way (all MM to Eng) because this was the agreement in the latest PCC and Eng was in favour as well. If you decide to change this it should not be so dramatic but I fear that we are acting against something agreed with more partners. On the other hand I do not see that they should worry that much that the funding goes to one coordination level or the other.
>
> Unfortunately the distribution of MM is not so simple as you think. We perfectly understand your view but after a few interactions with Arian and the EC in several amendments, the rules are not that easy and this is going to be endless if we start discussing a distribution now.
>
> Blocking the amendment for this alone would be unwise so we must find a solution that satisfies everyone. As it seems that putting the 11 MM under TID with the commitment of re-distributing later would keep everyone happy, we can try. I would need to talk to Arian to see if they do not object and how to fit it in the DoW but that is minor, I guess that he will help.
>
> So, in summary. Agreed that Eng is happy if we (TID) takes all the MM and resume the negotitation at a later stage? There is a least one moreone forthcoming amendment for the 2nd and 3rd Open calls.
>
> If you confirm I will try to see if the EC accepts it. A quick answer would be appreciated.
>
> Best regards
>
> Miguel
> El 04/04/2013 18:26, Andrea Manieri escribió:
> Dear Miguel,
>
> as I told you the issues was to assign to ENG some effort/budget with no clear reference to any work. Saying that is for OIL and the budget is just parked to ENG funding is not feasible.
>
> That was the reason to asking you the hard job to quickly come into an agreement for both allocating activities/responsibility and funding.
>
> I also told you that if the activity was not clear - as usual in other cases - should be the coordinator that keep the money in its budget for further allocation, as you did with open calls.
>
> Back to the point, I think, at the end, we come to a suitable agreement, at least from ENG perspective.
>
> I kindly ask you to verify with Juanjo for his approval and then let Javier finalise the budget.
>
> Later on we could address all the other missing details.
>
> Best regards,
> A
> point is that we cannot
>
> Il 04/04/2013 18:01, Miguel Carrillo ha scritto:
> Dear Andrea,
>
> I have to step in as Juanjo is under a lot of pressure according to my info.
>
> No. Juanjo has been unreachable these days due to the current situation (Arch week) and I haven't spoken to him since last week apart form a few seconds (and all about the Arch weeks, as you can imagine). When it was decided to change this the other day I was a bit surprised but I thought that it was somehow agreed with Juanjo or there was a reasonable rationale. I did not complain because I have a certain degree of mutual understanding with Eng after all these years and when you are around I try not to create more problems than necessary, I simply trusted you that there was a reason why.
>
> But this has to be clear. I never said that this had to be split in this amendment and was pretty happy with putting in Eng's hands this resources until the next one. I enclose one of the emails where I stated it. I also sent Andrea the message from Juanjo with the excel file distributing resources and tried to explain it. I believe that there is a misunderstanding here but this can be fixed now. When I heard that you wanted to split resources nearly in the last day, then I understandably needed to said that TID wanted our share as we are doing part of the work. In this context, I also had first understood that the OIL task was also for another amendment. So again, when Stefano showed me at the end of Monday that this was being added I thought that it was a bit rushed but I simply tried to help and not to add trouble.
>
> Maybe you understand now why I was not reacting so quickly yesterday (apart from other factors that I will not mention, calculating MM is not part of my normal duties and this was a bit unexpected for me - I did not have the time to pass it to the right section, but I needed to check internally the rates! In fact, I was forced to guess and made a mistake using an old rate). I know now what happened.
>
> Let us try to understand each other, this is simple if explained. It is not a matter or willing to contribute or not, what we are discussing is when to distribute the resources. And at this stage we were trying to simplify because this amendment is endless (there are many WPs and many things to deal with)
>
> Andrea, please do not see bad intentions, we are honestly trying to close things and to arrange everything in reasonable terms for everyone. It is simply that things go too fast and sometimes the info does not flow well.
>
> I understand that coordinating WP10 is not easy and that your responsibility is a bit heavy. But I would really appreciate it if you could try to be as flexible as you can to help Javier; Eng has coordinated things as complex as QualiPSo, you know how hard can it get sometimes.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Miguel
>
> El 04/04/2013 17:05, Andrea Manieri escribió:
> Dear Javier,
>
> please find enclosed the final version that include the missing shift in effort from TI (3) and rounded numbers (2) and the TID role as sent by Miguel yesterday.
>
> With respect the EAB effort/funding left, I'm assuming that Juanjo has been informed by MIguel. I understood from him that such effort should have been split among ENG and TID to finalise the OIL activities.
>
> If TID is not willing to contribute to the new task activities, then ENG can afford all the work and will take all the effort/funding of EAB.
>
> Thanks to Juanjo to clarify further,
>
> best,
>
> A.
>
>
> Il 04/04/2013 15:48, JAVIER DE PEDRO SANCHEZ ha scritto:
> Dear Andrea, I need your help again.
>
> 1.- So far today, the 11 PM from EAB-WP10 would be transferred to E-IIS.
>
> If these 11PM initially assigned to E-IIS are going to be splitted I need to know how many PM are going to be transferred to each involved partner in WP10, and of course I need the approval of Juanjo Hierro. If there is no a consensus yet, then we´ll have to wait for the next amendment to split these 11 PM.
> Please note that NEF doesn't admit decimals in PM's.
>
> 2.- The total effort in WP10 is 456 PM. Please review your excel with the distribution because there are 459.5 PMs. I have notice that you have added a new task. Maybe the problem is there.
>
> 3.- Pier is saying that his modifications are not integrate.
>
> So, I kindly ask you to send me another last version of WP10 according above. Could you please rename the document with a digit version in order to avoid misunderstandings?
>
> Thank you very much for your contribution and support.
>
> BR
> Javier.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> De: Andrea Manieri [mailto:manieri at eng.it]
> Enviado el: miércoles, 03 de abril de 2013 17:13
> Para: JAVIER DE PEDRO SANCHEZ; stefano de panfilis; JUAN JOSE HIERRO SUREDA; MIGUEL CARRILLO PACHECO
> Asunto: Re: [Fiware-administrative] FI-WARE: Amenmdnet 4 (DRAFT of new GPF) - errata corrige bis
>
> Dear Javier,
>
> sorry, but Miguel spotted a typo in effort splitting (thanks MIguel).
>
> Please find enclosed the (hopefully) final version of WP10.
>
> Wrt funding splitting, there's an agreement to split the 83k left by EAB as 40/43 among ENG and TID, roghly 7,5/7 MM each.
>
> sincerely,
>
> A.
> Il 03/04/2013 17:05, Andrea Manieri ha scritto:
> Dear Javier,
>
> please find enclosed an updated version of the WP10 DoW description. Please consider to use this one.
>
> Take into account also that TID was the only partner, involved in the WP, that have not provided yet the role description.
>
> best,
>
> A.
> p.s. I recall that the allocation of the whole EAB MM left to ENG is not acceptable nor by TID (Miguel) and ENG. Please consider to update NEF accordingly, otherwise ENG will not been able to sign it.
>
>
>
> Il 03/04/2013 16:48, JAVIER DE PEDRO SANCHEZ ha scritto:
> Dear all, please find enclosed the last version of the spreadsheet with the changes of the amendment 4. (Thank you very much for all the received comments)
>
> I have updated these data on NEF, so I've attached the draft of the new GPF to be reviewed for all of you. Please don't sign it until we have delivered the final version.
>
> Please confirm you agree with both documents.
>
> Note: We are receiving the latest modifications of the DoW from the WPL, as soon as I have received all of them, I'll send you the updated DoW to be reviewed. I hope it will be tomorrow.
>
> Thank you very much for your contribution and support.
>
> BR
> Javier.
>
>
> [firma correo jdps]
>
>
> ________________________________
>
> 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
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> Fiware-administrative mailing list
>
> Fiware-administrative at lists.fi-ware.eu<mailto:Fiware-administrative at lists.fi-ware.eu>
>
> https://lists.fi-ware.eu/listinfo/fiware-administrative
>
>
>
> ________________________________
>
> 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
>
>
>
> --
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> _/ _/_/ Miguel Carrillo Pacheco
> _/ _/ _/ _/ Telefónica Distrito Telefónica
> _/ _/_/_/ _/ _/ Investigación y Edifico Oeste 1, Planta 4
> _/ _/ _/ _/ Desarrollo Ronda de la Comunicación S/N
> _/ _/_/ 28050 Madrid (Spain)
> Tel: (+34) 91 483 26 77
>
> e-mail: mcp at tid.es<mailto:mcp at tid.es>
>
> Follow FI-WARE on the net
>
> Website: http://www.fi-ware.eu
> Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/pages/FI-WARE/251366491587242
> Twitter: http://twitter.com/Fiware
> LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/groups/FIWARE-4239932
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> ________________________________
>
> 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
>
>
>
> --
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> _/ _/_/ Miguel Carrillo Pacheco
> _/ _/ _/ _/ Telefónica Distrito Telefónica
> _/ _/_/_/ _/ _/ Investigación y Edifico Oeste 1, Planta 4
> _/ _/ _/ _/ Desarrollo Ronda de la Comunicación S/N
> _/ _/_/ 28050 Madrid (Spain)
> Tel: (+34) 91 483 26 77
>
> e-mail: mcp at tid.es<mailto:mcp at tid.es>
>
> Follow FI-WARE on the net
>
> Website: http://www.fi-ware.eu
> Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/pages/FI-WARE/251366491587242
> Twitter: http://twitter.com/Fiware
> LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/groups/FIWARE-4239932
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> ________________________________
>
> 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
>
>
>
> --
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> _/ _/_/ Miguel Carrillo Pacheco
> _/ _/ _/ _/ Telefónica Distrito Telefónica
> _/ _/_/_/ _/ _/ Investigación y Edifico Oeste 1, Planta 4
> _/ _/ _/ _/ Desarrollo Ronda de la Comunicación S/N
> _/ _/_/ 28050 Madrid (Spain)
> Tel: (+34) 91 483 26 77
>
> e-mail: mcp at tid.es<mailto:mcp at tid.es>
>
> Follow FI-WARE on the net
>
> Website: http://www.fi-ware.eu
> Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/pages/FI-WARE/251366491587242
> Twitter: http://twitter.com/Fiware
> LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/groups/FIWARE-4239932
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> ________________________________
>
> 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
>
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------
_/ _/_/ Miguel Carrillo Pacheco
_/ _/ _/ _/ Telefónica Distrito Telefónica
_/ _/_/_/ _/ _/ Investigación y Edifico Oeste 1, Planta 4
_/ _/ _/ _/ Desarrollo Ronda de la Comunicación S/N
_/ _/_/ 28050 Madrid (Spain)
Tel: (+34) 91 483 26 77
e-mail: mcp at tid.es
Follow FI-WARE on the net
Website: http://www.fi-ware.eu
Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/pages/FI-WARE/251366491587242
Twitter: http://twitter.com/Fiware
LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/groups/FIWARE-4239932
----------------------------------------------------------------------
________________________________
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
You can get more information about our cookies and privacy policies clicking on the following links: Privacy policy Cookies policy