SA2 Deliverable Review Form

Identification of the deliverable or milestone
Project: EMI Deliverable or milestone identifier: DJRA1.6.1
Title: DJRA1.6.1 – Integration Work Plan and Status Report Doc. identifier: EMI_JRA1.6.1_v4.doc
Author(s): André Giesler, Morris Riedel Due date: __

Identification of the reviewer
Name: A. Aimar, M.Alandes Pradillo, J.Cernak Affiliation: EMI Activity/External project or Institute: SA2

General comments

General comment on the whole document

A work plan should have a time line with all the milestones or a table with all the milestones, possibly with some details on the level of the delivered product. Please add a time chart or a time table inside the document or as annex.

Morris: a plan has been added marking EMI-1 as the major milestone. In general the activities of the integration deliverable have been aligned with the timeline of State-of-the-art, EMI-0, and EMI-1.

For each action/task there should be a clear explanation of which product team/developer is in charge for developing, testing and releasing it. Follow the guidelines and example available here that Maria has added (now that we have seen that the plans needed these guidelines). SA2 is glad to clarify the guidelines and support the authors of the document (not in writing it) just contact us.

Morris: The integration task is not like a technical work plan for the major technical areas compute, security, infrastructure, data. In contrast, it is an overlay of existing work within these areas and as such this document can be not directly structured like them.

https://twiki.cern.ch/twiki/bin/view/EMI/AreaWorkPlanTPL

Morris: Taken into account as best as possible.

Maria 24/11/10: To clarify with Morris

  • Definition of Integration in the context of JRA1. According to Morris, integration with external components (i.e. globus) is out of the scope of JRA1. I don´t share this point of view but this needs to be clarified. Moreover, I would like to say that SA2 just enables the integration of components describing guidelines and providing tools, but JRA1 is responsible for the overall Integration process.
  • Definition of a work plan: JRA1 should describe a work plan for the integration activities foreseen in the first year. This should include a state of the art describing integration activities in the four middleware stacks before EMI, how this is going to be harmonised now and which integration activities are going to be done in the first year making references to EMI-0 and EMI-1 releases. The different activities should clearly describe what, when and who.
  • Should interoperability be considered in the Integration work plan? According to Morris this is the case but in the DoW this deliverable doesn´t mention Interoperability at all.

Jozef 27/01/11 : SA2 review of DJRA161 v05 is attached. For this second revision, only Jozef is involved from SA2.

Topic attachments
I Attachment History Action Size DateSorted ascending Who Comment
Unknown file formatdocx EMI_JRA1.6.1_v4-1_jozef.docx r1 manage 533.7 K 2010-10-27 - 17:17 AlbertoAimar  
Microsoft Word filedoc EMI_JRA1.6.1_v4-1_maria.doc r1 manage 640.0 K 2010-10-27 - 17:16 AlbertoAimar  
Microsoft Word filedoc EMI_Integration_Plan-v0.5_jozef.doc r2 r1 manage 1100.5 K 2011-02-08 - 20:27 AGieslerExternal J Cernak review of DJRA161 v0.5 with addressed comments from A Giesler
Edit | Attach | Watch | Print version | History: r7 < r6 < r5 < r4 < r3 | Backlinks | Raw View | WYSIWYG | More topic actions
Topic revision: r7 - 2011-02-08 - AGieslerExternal
 
    • Cern Search Icon Cern Search
    • TWiki Search Icon TWiki Search
    • Google Search Icon Google Search

    EMI All webs login

This site is powered by the TWiki collaboration platform Powered by PerlCopyright &© 2008-2020 by the contributing authors. All material on this collaboration platform is the property of the contributing authors.
or Ideas, requests, problems regarding TWiki? use Discourse or Send feedback