[2257] in Enterprise Print Delivery Team
Re: Issues with the New Central Printing Service
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Theresa M Regan)
Wed Feb 6 05:10:41 2002
Message-Id: <5.0.2.1.2.20020205200914.02412bd8@po12.mit.edu>
Date: Wed, 06 Feb 2002 05:14:54 -0500
To: David F Lambert <LAMBERT@MITVMA.MIT.EDU>
From: Theresa M Regan <tregan@MIT.EDU>
Cc: Enterprise Printing Delivery Project Team <printdel@MIT.EDU>,
Roger A Roach <RAR@MIT.EDU>, Bob Ferrara <rferrara@MIT.EDU>,
Susan S Minai-Azary <AZARY@MIT.EDU>
In-Reply-To: <200202052012.PAA15540@fort-point-station.mit.edu>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Hi Dave,
I do not remember raising any new issues with Rocklyn. Possibly, the team
would like to document the list of open questions / issues that I raised
during our December and January meetings for review and agreement by all.
Rocklyn, if I am misrecollecting our conversation, please let me know which
new issues I raised.
My recent conversation with Rocklyn focused on specific details:
Rocklyn inquired... Is it "ok" to begin generating e-mail from
<computing-help@mit.edu> while the team considers my other questions around
the web form.
Example: if Computing-Help or others are going to respond to
customer inquiries, is there a way that they can display a person's current
information? (this question has been raised previously in e-mail)
If all three pieces of information is required, how does the
form behave? If the form does not allow a person to enter partial
information, then, it may be possible to send one e-mail mentioning that
the information is not on file vs one or more pieces of information is
incomplete (this concern has been raised previously)
If the e-mail is coming from <computing-help>, will this create
a new case in Casetracker? If no, will Computing Help receive some
notification that a note to a client has been sent on their behalf? (new
questions when Rocklyn and I chatted)
What about the restricted queues? Is the e-mail notification
intended for the restricted queues, too? Rocklyn, expressed yes. I
reminded him that there were open questions around the restricted queues
and processes.
We chatted about how the data collected via the web forms will
be associated with the various print requests. My comments focused
on... if I send to one of the restricted queues, how will that data be
tallied? Will it be tallied based on the restricted queues information or
my personal information? (these and similar questions are one that I
raised when we met in December and January)
We chatted ever so briefly about the feed from MOIRA to IPM.
As far as I can recollect, I did not raise any other issues during that
conversation.
While Susan, Jeff and Rocklyn chatted, I did resonate with several concerns
that they raised... entering data that is not validated and may need to be
cleaned up in the future; requiring authentication; and Rocklyn discussing
this service as a new business and its potential to grow.
Regards,
Theresa
At 03:11 PM 2/5/2002 -0500, David F Lambert wrote:
>Hello Susan & Theresa,
>
>At our weekly printdel meeting yesterday, Rocklyn shared some
>of the conversation he had with you recently. Based on his
>comments, it appears that you both have some issues or concerns
>regarding the implementation of the new central printing service.
>Given that we are already running production work with this new
>service and the team would like to wrap up their delivery work,
>it would be useful to resolve any pending issues you have sooner
>than later.
>
>Therefore, the print delivery team would like to request that
>you document your issues/concerns in a prioritized list, send the
>list along to printdel@mit.edu, and schedule us for an ITAG
>meeting (if you feel it's appropriate) as soon as possible.
>If OCP and ITAG have differing issues, two prioritized
>lists are fine with us. Additionally, if Theresa wants to meet
>separately from the ITAG meeting, that's fine too.
>
>I know we all have MIT's best interest in mind. So, the team
>is very confident we can resolve any remaining issues/concerns
>to everyone's satisfaction.
>
>We would like to address your concerns sooner than later. This
>has been a long and tedious project which needs to get wrapped up.
>With production work already being handled by IPM, resolving any
>remaining issues now would be beneficial to all involved.
>
>Thanks in advance for your timely response.
>
>Dave (for the printdel team)
