[172] in I/T Delivery
Delivery Team Leaders meeting minutes 5/29/1998
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Bill Cattey)
Fri May 29 12:00:44 1998
Date: Fri, 29 May 1998 15:59:40 +0000 ()
From: Bill Cattey <wdc@MIT.EDU>
To: delivery@MIT.EDU
Delivery Team Leaders Meeting
5/29/1998
Next meeting is June 26, 1998 at 10:00 AM in N42-286
STATUS/ANNOUNCELENTS
Hiring Status
Mike and Bill still have a slot open.
One other slot open in delivery
Bob went to the placement firm, Atlantis to look for folks with
Oracle talent. No appropriate Oracle people were found, but some
promising others were identified.
Project DB
New front page under consideration which will move Completed, and
Terminated projects to another page. We're going to wait until
miki returns before going live with it.
Q: What about On-Hold projects?
A: We didn't want to move any other projects than Completed and
Terminated. On-Hold seems like it should still stay in people's
faces.
ITLT Update
Q: Will there be impact on Delivery Priorities staffing up the Y2k team?
A: There will be a statement issued soon.
There will be some shifting of people, but there will be back-fill
to cover exposures.
Background: The ITLT minutes described a change in the Y2K situation:
Departments have been asking IS to devote more resources to help with
Y2k issues. There are many levels of effort IS could put forth. We
going to start off with making a Y2K team that will begin to act as
a service bureau/clearing house where departments can go to for
information, and direction to more help.
Y2K project
see above.
Project Management Institute & local SIG
Looking to gear up something in the fall timeframe to get more people
thinking about project management.
There will be discussions with Brenda Gillingham and Wade about what
activities will be best for us.
New Delivery Web Pages
Delivery pages now follow the nice looking IS standard form.
They include some pointers to Integration stuff now.
Bill raises the point that a thread of "who" needs to be woven
through the IS pages, in addition to the very good "what" and
"how" that is currently displayed. This is an issue with the
entirety of the IS web pages, not delivery specifically.
The "Contacting Us" section should add "about delivery" to clarify that
the invitation for questions and comments is about delivery, not about
the pages themselves.
----
REVIEW OF DELIVERY PROJECTS WITH INTEGRATION REQUIREMENTS/DEPENDENCIES
Review: Integration's purpose is:
To help with purchase amd building new infrastructure components.
To participate in evolving the infrastructure over time.
To provide a clearing house of information in the areas of:
technology watch.
data administration
developer tools/support
standards
Susan handed out a list of Integration projects. She gave a brief
description of each and we discussed them a bit.
--
A second handout was: Developer's Checklist for Integration:
Project Beginning Send e-mail to itit@mit.edu
Early in project Send scope and data model or
request help with data model
Before design solidifies Request design review
Before Coding Send list of infrastructure you
will use
This is a good quicky check list to make sure that the Integration
team is brought on board appropriately for a new project.
The scope statement helps tell what areas might be impacted, and helps
identify areas where the new project leaders are unaware of overlap or
conflict with other project areas.
The data model should be a very high level data model, and should
require very little time. "If you use nouns to describe your
application, you have a data model. If you use only a few nouns, your
data model will be really quick to specify."
The design review is for infrastructure, interfacing, and sanity
checking of design. It is *NOT* a code review.
----
COMPETENCY GROUP UPDATE AND Q/A
Major topic: The Hot Technologies Survey
Allison handed out excerpts from the 1998 Hot Technologies Report with
definitions and helpful tips, and descriptions. She also handed out
our survey submission sorted by name and by cluster.
The first run through of the survey needed more leadership, and more
common understanding of what the different definitions and levels
meant.
Side note: The list of topics that appear in the survey is set by the
members of the steering committee from their changing experience.
The summary is not a skill-based assessment. Instead it is intended
to be descriptive of the person's primary activity as he or she works.
The focus is on individual contributors rather than team
leaders.
We discussed definitions and levels a bit.
Need to get some feedback on changes to the classifications based on
our better understanding.
----
ABBREVIATED ROUNDTABLE
