Re: [OpenEgypt:2114] Digest for openegypt@googlegroups.com - 2 updates in 2 topics

[Ahmad Gharbeia]

We've had similar notes previously.
Can you please document yours on the wiki:
http://wiki.egyptfoss.com/index.php/Talk:FOSS_portal

For the record.

Ahmad

open...@googlegroups.com wrote on 26/07/14 12:54:
> Today's topic summary
>
> Group: http://groups.google.com/group/openegypt/topics
>
> * EgyptFOSS Tender <#group_thread_0> [1 Update]
> * [OpenEgypt:2112] Digest for open...@googlegroups.com - 2 updates
> in 2 topics <#group_thread_1> [1 Update]
>
> EgyptFOSS Tender
> <http://groups.google.com/group/openegypt/t/b756d5f65fdf0e1c>
>
> Mohamed Sayed <unixme...@gmail.com> Jul 25 08:49AM -0700
>
> Hi,
>
> I haven't read the whole thing in detail yet, but here are my
> comments so
> far:
>
> 0-The scope seems huge, maybe the sub-portals can be in separate
> bids or
> dropped. please see point #2
> 1-There doesn't seem to be a coherent identity for the site. If the
> purpose
> is to support and state an official Egyptian position towards FOSS
> then I
> think you don't need such a big site
> 2-Lots of duplication with other well established, well maintained
> portals
> around the world.
> 3-Where is the mission statement for this portal? what metrics will
> be used
> to measure its success/failure in achieving its purpose
> 4-I find the overall time line inadequate. 20 months total? I recommend
> re-considering this and make it such that that there are 1-3 months and
> adopt a real agile approach.
> 5-There is an architecture diagram, and then there is a 0.5 month
> deliverable for architecture. So based on a very long experience , I
> will
> tell you that 2 weeks is not enough for a well thought out, reviewed
> and
> adjusted architecture especially if you really end up with that much
> stuff
> in scope
> 6-There is a lot of bloat, I would like to see justifications of the
> requirements for an API. The non-functional requirements should be
> explained better. When you talk about scalability you need to
> qualify this
> a bit. In the very simplest of terms, a scalable system is one that
> is able
> to utilize the resources available in an efficient matter.
> Scalability is
> not one size or one direction. A scalable system should be scalable
> up or
> down. Referring to a horiztonally scalable system without some
> qualification on how well the resources will be utilized can simply
> mean We
> will pay to waste.
>
> I would like to iterate the idea that we should consider refining the
> sub-portals and their missions and then think of them as autonomous
> units
> bound by a coherent strategy.
>
> Regards
> Mohamed
>
> UTC+2, haitham nabil wrote:
>
> شباب الاوبن سورس
>