You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
The Open Energy Database (oedb), part of the Open Energy Platform (oep) is now used by two projects (open_eGo and open_FRED). Some important parts of the concept were discussed in the open_eGo project team and then implemented. After using the database a lot some issues came up that could/should be changed for the following projects.
In order to ensure a transparent and open way of making and documenting decisions we defined a decision making process that is shown in the graphic. 2016_12_05_decision_making.pdf
First decision is a decision if and how we use the decision making. We solve the chicken-egg-situation and can test the application on a real example. Feel free to comment on everything!
Question/Proposal/Decision Title:
We implement a decision making process as shown in the graphic to manage the oep and oedb!
Deadline:
9.12.2016 14:00 for the discussion
Documentation:
In the openmod-Wiki
Constraints/Participants:
All active open_eGo and open_FRED team members must participate.
At least 3 other active openmod members must participate.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
More people have to be invited to the openmod-initative group in order to start the decision making for the openmod Platform.
I can't invite people because I'm just a member and not an owner.
How do we handle ownership and invitations for the openmod. Looks like an other decision we can start here. @ingmars @JCRichstein @nworbmot @sjpfenninger
It generally seems to be an adequate way to decide on topics.
I wonder if the process is flexible enough for e.g. discussing and/or deciding in a webconference (the information of the whereabouts of course would have to be transparently reported in an issue beforehand as well as afterwards)?
we had nice feedback on the oemof developer day here in Berlin about the flexibility of the process.
Some decisions may need the time and a discussion while others (eg coding) needs to be faster and two weeks waiting for nobody responding is definitely not working!
The idea was to also have a fast process with an direct implementation and a two weeks veto/discussion.
The focus is on the implementation and easy handling right now.
For webcos and meetings we can make a template to document the decisions and also add the options for a veto for everybody that wasn't there. What do you think about that?
The Open Energy Database (oedb), part of the Open Energy Platform (oep) is now used by two projects (open_eGo and open_FRED). Some important parts of the concept were discussed in the open_eGo project team and then implemented. After using the database a lot some issues came up that could/should be changed for the following projects.
In order to ensure a transparent and open way of making and documenting decisions we defined a decision making process that is shown in the graphic.
2016_12_05_decision_making.pdf
First decision is a decision if and how we use the decision making. We solve the chicken-egg-situation and can test the application on a real example. Feel free to comment on everything!
Question/Proposal/Decision Title:
We implement a decision making process as shown in the graphic to manage the oep and oedb!
Deadline:
9.12.2016 14:00 for the discussion
Documentation:
In the openmod-Wiki
Constraints/Participants:
All active open_eGo and open_FRED team members must participate.
At least 3 other active openmod members must participate.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: