[Go-essp-tech] Call times

[stephen.pascoe at stfc.ac.uk]

Hi Gavin,

If you and Luca is really feel it is urgent to demonstrate the P2P system this Tuesday then okay.  I hadn't realised you were planning to do the demo when I wrote on Saturday so it seemed equally justified to cover the matrix.  I've now found a private email where you mentioned it so that's fair enough: I certainly would have been less forthright if I had known.

In future I hope we can discuss the agenda on go-essp-tech and put it on the Agenda wiki (http://esgf.org/wiki/EsgfCmip5Meetings), something I acknowledge I've also been bad at doing.  It's ironic that I was trying to be more organised than usual in setting an agenda for Tuesday :-).

I think I need to clarify a few things.

My desire for the requirements matrix discussion is to have a chance to explain and refine the methodology, to hear opinions from the developers of both GW and P2P and to agree how we use it to drive improvements in the systems.  It is not to finalise any scores or make binding decisions about who deploys what and when.  Karl's document, that I will need some time to digest, goes a long way towards putting that process in place.

I still think the most efficient way to cover the basics of the matrix is by telco, rather than me writing a paragraph about each of the items and about the methodology in general, however if we aren't looking at it on Tuesday I have a few days to write some explanatory notes.

Cheers,
Stephen.



---
Stephen Pascoe  +44 (0)1235 445980
Centre of Environmental Data Archival
STFC Rutherford Appleton Laboratory, Harwell Oxford, Didcot OX11 0QX, UK

From: Gavin M. Bell [mailto:gavin at llnl.gov]<mailto:[mailto:gavin at llnl.gov]>
Sent: 21 January 2012 20:45
To: Cecelia DeLuca
Cc: Pascoe, Stephen (STFC,RAL,RALSP); Luca.Cinquini at jpl.nasa.gov<mailto:Luca.Cinquini at jpl.nasa.gov>; go-essp-tech at ucar.edu<mailto:go-essp-tech at ucar.edu>
Subject: Re: Call times

Cecilia,

I would like us to keep the usual scheduled time of 8-9am PDT for demonstrating the P2P system.
This would avoid confusion and ensure that we get the appropriate audience.  The matrix discussion can be scheduled for another time.  Both these topics are important and should be addressed when everyone can be present.  Moving the time at this late date may introduce inadvertent confusion.

Not to be contrary, however, I think it is important to stick to the usual time.  The 8-9PDT hour is and has been the best compromise to optimize attendance considering the disparate time zones.  Perhaps we can schedule the other meeting for the following Tuesday, January 31st at 8-9PDT?

Thanks.

On 1/21/12 1:14 PM, Cecelia DeLuca wrote:

Hi Stephen, I should have put MT on the times for our local  time.  My

intent was to propose

the hour before, 8-9MT/7-8PT, for the p2p, and the usual hour

9-10MT/8-9PT for the matrix.

That order would make sense too for the discussion.

Best, Cecelia









--

Gavin M. Bell

--



 "Never mistake a clear view for a short distance."

               -Paul Saffo



-- 
Scanned by iCritical.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.ucar.edu/pipermail/go-essp-tech/attachments/20120123/b69ddb83/attachment.html