| User | Post |
|
6:31 pm
February 14, 2010
|
DenisG
| | Saarbrücken, Germany (GMT+1) | |
| Member | posts 69 | |
|
|
Post edited 5:23 am – February 16, 2010 by DenisG
Hello there,
I've compiled a little summary of what I had in mind when I started the whole management discussion. Please comment!
http://pb.ueberl33t.net/upload…..390881.pdf
Please also comment on language and style, since I'm not a native speaker.
PS: How do I attach files to forum posts? Is there a preview function?
|
|
|
7:34 pm
February 14, 2010
|
Rocket-To-The-Moon
| | Altus, Oklahoma, USA | |
| Member | posts 685 | |
|
|
This is a very nicely done overview. Your English is very good, I would never know that you weren't a native English user.
I am starting to come around to the necessity of having a good management system in place. The question is how should CSTART implement such a system? We have already explored some online applications that can help, but we need to devise the operation of the entire system. I am personally a big fan of Google Docs since it allows realtime collaboration. Docs is a good way to handle some of the interactions that would typically be done in face to face meetings.
I think that our next task should be to outline the process and how we want to go forward.
We also need an official place to upload files such as your .pdf; Google Docs might solve that problem also.
|
Main Workgroups: Propulsion & Spacecraft Engineering
|
|
|
2:19 am
February 15, 2010
|
rpulkrabek
| | |
| Member | posts 348 | |
|
|
Rocket-To-The-Moon said:
We also need an official place to upload files such as your .pdf; Google Docs might solve that problem also.
It's my understanding that we should be uploading our files to the repository. This has been done already with the CLLARE overview pdf, OHKLA CAD files, some fuel analysis code and the USOFS source code.
As for the document, I agree, it was well written and I also agree with your overall point of view. My final design project in university had a requirement to include what are known as a morphological chart (gives all available options) and a pugh matrix (design matrix shown in the pdf) also a gantt chart for planning and time management. These gave me the feeling like we were putting our decisions to some sort of mathematical function to output the best design. This was then also good, because we could explain to our customer why we went with the decisions we did.
|
|
|
4:46 am
February 15, 2010
|
DenisG
| | Saarbrücken, Germany (GMT+1) | |
| Member | posts 69 | |
|
|
May I suggest that a google group is created? Everyone who wants to participate is joined to this group. When creating a new google docs document, one can invite a whole group so that everyone in there can work on that document. Also, who has access to the repo? What is needed for wiki editing?
|
|
|
4:47 am
February 15, 2010
|
Luke Maurits
| | Adelaide, Australia | |
| Admin
| posts 1483 | |
|
|
I have only given this a brief skim read so far, but it looks promising and I am looking forward to reading it fully offline once the hour of wifi access I've bought for tonight runs out. From my quick first read, though, I am quite in agreement with your broad idea. I have been thinking about this more and I am becoming ever more convinced that not only is a process like this necessary, but actually won't even get in the way of things to much or suck all the fun out of the project.
|
Main CLLARE workgroups: Mission Planning, Navigation and Guidance. I do maths, physics, C, Python and Java.
|
|
|
8:51 am
February 15, 2010
|
brmj
| | Rochester, New York, United States | |
| Member | posts 402 | |
|
|
I too haven't finished reading it in any detail thus far, but so far my impression is positive. This seems to be basically in line with what we need. I agree with the comments about reducing barriers to entry as well. I wonder if some of the trouble we have with retaining new members comes from the difficulty in mining our several thousand forum posts and frequently outdated wiki for information on our projects. I suppose it might be quite intimidating to a newcomer.
One trivial styalistic concern is the use of "apprehension" on page three to mean "understanding" or "comprehension". This is a perfectly valid use of the word by its dictionary definition, but in American English, "apprehension" is far more commonly used in the sense that means "anxiety" or "dread". I can't speak knowledgeably about how it is used in other dialects of English.
Also, at the end of page three you use the word "objective" when you should have used "objectively". Native English speakers commonly make mistakes of that type, however, so it really isn't a big issue.
|
Main work groups: Propulsion (booster), Spacecraft Engineering, Computer Systems, Navigation and Guidance (software)
|
|
|
10:35 pm
February 15, 2010
|
Luke Maurits
| | Adelaide, Australia | |
| Admin
| posts 1483 | |
|
|
The anxiety/dread interpretation of the word "apprehension" is also the default interpretation in Australian English, and I had to stop and think at that point as well, so it seems like it would definitely be best to change the wording there.
|
Main CLLARE workgroups: Mission Planning, Navigation and Guidance. I do maths, physics, C, Python and Java.
|
|
|
5:24 am
February 16, 2010
|
DenisG
| | Saarbrücken, Germany (GMT+1) | |
| Member | posts 69 | |
|
|
'Apprehension' reworded to 'understanding.' Another thing learned. Thanks! :)
|
|
Login 
Register 
Search 
Home
Topic RSS 
