09.01.2012 Project Executive Board Conference Call

From IMarine Wiki

Jump to: navigation, search



Time: Monday January 9, 2012, 15:00 - ... Europe/Rome

  • To assess the actions identified in the previous PEB conference call;
  • To assess the first two months WP reports prepared by each WP leader. At my best knowledge we should discuss all WPs but WP11 since I am not aware of any activity in that WP. Each WP leader will have at most 5 minutes to present the activity and to report on issues and deviations from the plan;
  • To assess the status of deliverables;
  • To assess the status of milestones.


TD: P. Pagano

WP1: J. Michel, L. Nguyen

WP2: D. Castelli

WP3: A. Ellenbroek

WP4: H. Hanahoe

WP5: A. Manzi

WP6: L. Candela

WP7: G. Giammatteo

WP8: M. Simi (ABSENT)

WP9: G. Coro

WP10: G. Farantatos

WP11: G. Kakaletris

Main Discussions and Actions

Previous PEB Conference Call Actions Assessment

Monthly report procedure and tools (a series of actions)

  • DONE

The TD will circulate by email the proposal governing TRAC configuration

  • DONE

A template for documenting technical milestones produced by WP8, WP9, WP10, and WP11 will be circulated by the TD;

  • Not completed yet (a draft is under discussion);


A template for documenting technical milestones produced by WP8, WP9, WP10, and WP11 will be circulated by the TD;

M1-2 Activity Report Assessment

On WP1, the main issues are:

  • effort reporting was due last week. Only three contributions have been received so far;
  • on QATF, it still unclear who is part of this task force;
    • This task force should comprise CNR, ERCIM and Andrea M. (TD deputy);
  • on the Quality Plan and missing sections:
    • the missing sections should stem from WP3 and WP6 activities;
    • WP6 related parts (namely policies) might be produced in a couple of days;
    • WP3 related parts will be produced in a couple of days;
  • the report contained in the main page should be a summary rather than a per task report;

On WP2, the main issues are:

  • MoU production has been documented in this WP also (also in WP1), to decide what is the 'right' WP (probably WP2);

On WP3, the main issues are:

  • the report contained in the main page should be a summary rather than a per task report;
  • (to all WP reports) the report is informative. However, it is expected that this information is circulated among project members (through mailing lists) timely (i.e. when occurs rather than at reporting time only);

On WP4, the main issues are (actually what we have to do):

  • reshape monthly report content;
  • produce the enewsletter;
  • update the flyers;
  • finalize D4.1;
    • the Quality Plan do not impose that every deliverable must have a 'Conclusion' section;
  • apply for 3rd Marine Board Forum blue technologies presentation (deadline for application 16 Jan 2012) workshop; Anton should be involved in this activity with Trust & TD;
  • TD received a personal invitation from Ward Appeltans for “Linking data systems, dissemination and science applications” to be held in Feb'12, Ostend (Belgium);
  • set up LinkedIn account, start discussion and seek members;
  • upload dissemination & communication tracker & press clippings to BSCW;
  • upload iMarine Board Member profiles on Channel and finalise all channel content and functionalities by end Jan 2012.

On WP5, the main issues are:

  • D5.1 is delayed (now it is ready for review);
  • EMI MoU is documented here also (it should be moved to WP2);

On WP6, the main issues are:

  • the lack of communication, e.g. some activities have been documented in the report only;
    • the WP leader is expected to stimulate the intra-WP communication;
    • other partners have not documented any activity, e.g., UNESCO, CRIA, FIN;
  • on T6.4, the activity documented is a bit out of scope (it is on Infrastructure deployment rather than VRE deployment)
    • CERN partake to this kind of activity also (because of the lack of effort, CERN has not documented this activity in T6.4);
    • because of the importance of this activity, it is worth to document it;

On WP7, the main issues/activities performed are:

  • D7.1 has been created but released. However, it is not clear where to put in (either gCube Wiki vs iMarine Wiki);
    • TD proposes to use the gCube Wiki (https://gcube.wiki.gcube-system.org);
    • TD deputy highlighted that the deliverable consists of two parts, the procedures and the stuffs related to the software;
  • MS30 (M2) is achieved but the testing infrastructure;
    • the not availability of the testing infrastructure should be reported among the deviations;
  • NKUA contribution is missing;
  • Milestones achievement procedure and template is contained in the Quality Plan;

On WP8, the main issues/activities performed are (WP8 leader is not present):

  • a lot of activities have been performed;
  • a plan of these activities is expected;

On WP9, the main issues/activities performed are:

  • no report on activities performed by NKUA on T9.2 has been produced;
    • NKUA has experienced problems with emails;
    • Terradue activity is actually contributing to a number of Tasks. Because of the effort, Terradue have documented this activity in a task only;
      • it is documented that part of the software is part of gCube 2.7.2, it should be checked to what extent this activity has been performed;

On WP10, the main issues/activities performed are:

  • integration/collaboration between T10.1 and T10.4;
  • on data manipulation (T10.2), effort is on redesign the data transformation by relying on PE2ng facilities;
  • on data mining and visualisation (T10.3), CNR completed the design of a new service;
  • NKUA started creating a number of tickets documenting planned activity. All partners should proceed in this way, e.g. FORTH team should transform the document they created to a set of TRAC tickets. Planned activities (sw) should be in TRAC

On WP11, the main issues/activities performed are:

  • there is a lack of coordination, for this reason has been planned a conference call (tomorrow);
  • the FAO activity reported is a bit out of scope wrt WP11, namely because of the lack of a common framework;

Per WP reports performed during the conference call should be short and focus on major issues, major achievements, etc.


  • TD should send an email reporting the major issues affecting the current version of the Monthly report, e.g. lack of contributions.

Deliverables status

  • D5.1 is currently under review
    • by today the review should be complete;
  • D6.1 is under editing, in a couple of days it should be ready for review;
  • D1.1 will be finalised during this week;
  • D4.1 is currently under editing / review;
    • the training section (FAO) is still not ready;
  • D7.1 it is ready but in the Wiki, it will be completed by end of this week;


Milestones status

A number of them have been achieved;


  • TD should describe the procedure for documenting milestones achieved;


  • future plans should be added to the monthly report;
    • this should be concise (a bullet list);
  • Next conference call, is planned February the 6th;


Personal tools