[Fiware-tools] Reply letter to Y2 cost rejections

[Scheibli, Daniel]

Hi Davide,

thanks for clarifying the tables.

So if I understand it right, then we argue with 4 categories of efforts:

1.)    SW development

2.)    Documents like manuals, tutorials etc.

3.)    Others like giving webinars, having conference calls etc.

4.)    The accompanying deliverable documents.
On page one we argue that mainly 1, followed by 2 and 3 consumed the majority of efforts;
4 was only 10-15%.

But the deliverable chapters so far only talks about 4. So I would propose to move the tables
(which address 2) into the same deliverable chapters.

Also I think we might consider putting some points on 1 in there to illustrate that we indeed
did work on the SW. Or is the idea to intentionally rely on the Technical Review Report quotes
from page 1 - like "saying ok you already agreed that we did substantial work there, so no need
to go into further details there as"?
If so, we should at least make it a bit more explicit in the deliverable chapters. Otherwise one
is wondering why we talk so much about 4 if that was only the 10-15%.

JM2C,
Daniel




Those tables are meant to report by tool the external resources that were
referenced from the deliverables, to give evidence that contents were created and available,
even if outside the SW accompanying deliverables.

for example:
FF Connector has (had) a pdf manual available from the FI-WARE forge

I hope this clarify these tables ... please share your comments a vision so that we can decide
if it worth keep, change or remove them.



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.fiware.org/private/old-fiware-tools/attachments/20140307/d5871647/attachment.html>