Sender | Message | Time |
---|---|---|
28 Dec 2018 | ||
tmallard | Checking it out @udit.kumar.sahoo:matrix.org , thx. | 23:30:46 |
30 Dec 2018 | ||
sean | udit.kumar.sahoo: Open to trying out Capella. Though, from what I've looked into, it seems to be more of a systems architecting tool than a systems engineering tool. In any case, I'd be happy to see any direction toward an MBSE implementation, so if its lite weight nature is enough to do just that, I'm on-board. | 19:13:59 |
sean | If it's not too much of a step back, I took the liberty of starting a trade study sheet for what systems engineering tool we should use. Let me know if the criterias make sense, need weight tweaking, or appending to. The score sheet was intentionally blacked out, as to not bias ones influence to try and game the system, but if you really can't resist peaking, there's a separate tab for the score sheet. https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1wiEJpikaXGcwHw3XVeOSRUS-AmC8EcL4AT4KtHakQSE/edit# | 19:18:43 |
tmallard | sean, this seems to imply a direct way to link in engineering as separate components if I'm getting the view, looks good for clarity of modelling to implementing it: " In order to embed these functions, one or several decompositions of the system into logical components are to be built, each function being allocated to one component. These logical components will later tend to be the basic decomposition for development/sub-contracting, integration, reuse, product and configuration management item definitions (but other criteria will be taken into account to define the boundaries for these items) " | 23:58:57 |
31 Dec 2018 | ||
neutronstar | Did I miss a criteria regarding supported platforms? I think some use Windows, at least I use Linux. I can also imagine that some use Mac. | 10:44:09 |
neutronstar | Perhaps possibility to interact using a mobile phone would be nice as well? | 10:44:45 |
udit.kumar.sahoo | neutronstar
Capella does have Linux and Mac Cocoa versions. It's a 64 bit software. | 12:20:40 |
udit.kumar.sahoo |
I don't think this is yet provided by any MBSE tool vendor | 12:21:33 |
Patrick Donovan | thoughts on the proposed drive structure in the tab labeled "PROPOSED1" here? | 22:05:09 |
1 Jan 2019 | ||
tmallard | Capella also has a 64bit win10 I'm downloading now, looks robust for teams... | 02:00:10 |
2 Jan 2019 | ||
udit.kumar.sahoo |
Patrick, I would think of having Archives in every folder. The reason is all WIP documents will be in the Proposed folder structure and the older versions can be in the archives in the same folder. I can explain this if it is not clear. | 15:15:08 |
udit.kumar.sahoo | What is your thought on renaming Deliverable to "Working Groups"? | 15:16:22 |
udit.kumar.sahoo | Under Working research, we can have individual people's folders. They would manage the internal folder structure under their own folder. | 15:18:10 |
udit.kumar.sahoo | Ideally "Working Research" can be named as Team Individual Folders. | 15:21:11 |
udit.kumar.sahoo | I am considering using Git for ensuring config control of approved documents. Approved as in reviewed by Coral members and formally shared across the team. Any thoughts on this perspective? | 15:22:58 |
sean | That was the intent of #89 Branch 97 currently contains a draft CONOPS template in asciidoc. Feel free to add your feedback | 20:50:25 |
sean | Download DellSat-77 use case.png | 21:08:27 |
sean | The UML diagram generator doesn't quite work in Github yet, but if you were to convert to, say, pdf or html using a static-site generator it'd look like this^ | 21:08:34 |
6 Jan 2019 | ||
Patrick Donovan | In reply to @udit.kumar.sahoo:matrix.org sorry for the delay, I've been out of town. I think Git with config control sounds great as a next step. My proposed Drive structure is more of a stopgap measure to make the Drive a little more user-friendly until all of that Git stuff is in place. Individual folders for documents produced by each person moves a bit in the opposite direction from simplification. How about a middle ground? Including initials in the file name and/or listing the author at the top of the document. The folder renaming sounds fine to me. The archive-in-each-folder makes perfect sense to me and it sounds great. | 04:21:50 |
udit.kumar.sahoo | In reply to @paurd:matrix.orgFair enough Patrick Donovan. I'm considering creating some standard cover page for the documents. It'll have all the details such as name, approved by, document title, doc number, summary, application, sub system, security classification, export classification, keywords, etc. | 05:15:38 |
8 Jan 2019 | ||
suzi.bianco | Hey @room what's the stats here? Do we have a system? I think I'll start puting Andy's requirements in a sheet doc for the time being so we can actually begin working on that aspect of things... | 04:43:46 |
udit.kumar.sahoo | I would suggest we also include the spreadsheet we discussed for requirements | 04:45:18 |
suzi.bianco | Is that the same thing? I'm confused. I confess I got really lost in the discussions here... | 05:00:45 |
outbound | I've seen requirements listed en banc in a spreadsheet, and that was the document. I've also seen spreadsheets used to get things organized, then a more formal document written in MS Word, etc. | 05:02:46 |
udit.kumar.sahoo |
No worries Suzi, I'll put the link here | 05:14:07 |
suzi.bianco | Thanks Udit | 05:30:57 |
udit.kumar.sahoo | Here you go suzi.bianco : https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1lC07ZjyZTOYCB1rvfPwLYC_lRq8tpWjqy4CPN6vKhIQ/edit?usp=sharing | 05:59:34 |
suzi.bianco | Oh,that!😉 Thanks!! | 06:02:50 |
udit.kumar.sahoo | Here is the word document template. Please do provide your feedback. Based on the feedback, I'll create spreadsheet and presentation templates too. | 06:55:04 |
udit.kumar.sahoo | https://docs.google.com/document/d/1KvANzEeAgH2vblxyugmWGUtAvjocHVxMhflLrm-YV8A/edit?usp=sharing | 06:55:07 |