[Cesg-all] [CMC] combined Priority List of draft Projects

[Shames, Peter M (312B)]

Hi Nestor,

You are correct.  I missed the fact that this was only supposed to be for DRAFT projects.  The inclusion of some current projects in the list was the primary source of my confusion … that and missing the word "draft" in the subject.

I think it would help in the future, and would remove confusion, if the existing projects were removed from the table.

Thanks, Peter


From: Nestor Peccia <Nestor.Peccia at esa.int>
Date: Friday, October 7, 2016 at 12:02 AM
To: Peter Shames <peter.m.shames at jpl.nasa.gov>
Cc: CCSDS Engineering Steering Group - CESG All <cesg-all at mailman.ccsds.org>, Martin Pilgram <martin.pilgram at dlr.de>
Subject: Re: [Cesg-all] [CMC] combined Priority List of draft Projects

Peter

I believe that you have not understood that Martin's  table is only for draft Projects

Now my responses

  *   Delta-DOR WG was completely missing.  I added it in the attached, but greyed out all the votes since there were none.
Totally wrong. You are addressing already approved Projects and Martin's Table only refers to draft Projects.
If you go to the CWE and display the Draft Project View you will discover that the D-DOR WG has no draft Projects.
I can imagine that you got confused because the Table contains some already approved Projects (which were draft at April 2016, when I originally created the Table). Martin has highlighted them in the 1st column with a different colour, but forgot to clarify all the details of how to interpret the Table. This has some consequences when broadcasting the mail to the whole CESG-all list.
  *   I do not know if other WG or projects are missing, but I recommend that each AD take a look at their own.
You are endorsing my recommendation.
  *   Three of the agencies did not place any Priorities at all.  Some did not indicate any Priority 1. I would think an agency might state a high priority even if they were not able to contribute.
I have asked, as CESG Chair, to the CMC to take this action on board during the Brazil meeting. Martin has used a Table initially prepared by me. My other request was to receive the CMC response 2 weeks at least prior to Rome. Martin sent me a draft some weeks ago noting that several Agencies were still missing, I have reconfirmed our need even if the Table would be incomplete. This will be discussed at the next CESG / CMC Joint meeting.
  *   Some active projects have no priority 1 votes, but they are active and are getting resources from agencies.  I think that is OK, but I think that violates your newly made up rule ("a BB shall  have 2 Agencies marking it as Priority 1").
Correct. The Table was produced in April 2016 and some Projects are now approved Projects. Martin has highlighted them with different background colours (see 1st column).
Please understand that Agencies are communicating us their priorities for draft Projects, which  have no rules, i.e. no violation.
The rule is a CMC rule, suggested by the CESG Chair, but the only body managing resources is the CMC, not the CESG.
The rule applies when an AD submits a Draft Project for CMC approval. If no all resources are granted, the Project will remain as Draft. We have still the issue of the Projects missing resources before the rule entered into effect.
  *   I think any such proposed new rule needs to be discussed and agreed to by the CESG and concurred to by the CMC.  I do not believe that has happened.
I do not understand. There is only one rule and under my humble opinion is enough. We can discuss this during our CESG meeting under the Agenda item "resources"
ciao
nestor

This message and any attachments are intended for the use of the addressee or addressees only.

The unauthorised disclosure, use, dissemination or copying (either in whole or in part) of its

content is not permitted.

If you received this message in error, please notify the sender and delete it from your system.

Emails can be altered and their integrity cannot be guaranteed by the sender.



Please consider the environment before printing this email.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.ccsds.org/pipermail/cesg-all/attachments/20161007/923ab198/attachment.html>