[SpaceProgram] Communication / Collaboration tool

Sun Sep 16 14:34:11 CEST 2012

The area where I can see us needing a PM package is in the management of SpaceGAMBIT iteself
We will have multiple projects with various deadlines and gating events (grant submission, selection, negotiation, award, reporting etc) that will need to be tracked, as well as the fundraising, and annual symposium.

Again though, these task do not require the elaborate engineering PLM/PM tools.
We do have Prolific.com as one option.  It is a commercial tool but for use on this project I could probably negotiate a deal.  The principle behind it is a good friend and supporter of Maui Makers. (Reichart von Wolfsheild).

Jerry Isdale
http://MauiMakers.com
http://www.mauimakers.com/blog/thursday-public-meeting/

On Sep 16, 2012, at 2:23 AM, Jerry Isdale wrote:

>  If we were doing the full Build A Starship project, then yes definitely we would need a PLM/PM package.  Most of the HSP/SpaceGAMBIT projects are going to be far too small to utilize a large PLM (product life cycle management) or Program Management package. This sort of software, with its requirements management and resources, etc can be quite useful on big projects, but often requires dedicated staff to maintain it.  There are much lower effort ways to manage a small project... especially with a very small team (1-3 people).
> 
> 
> Jerry Isdale
> http://MauiMakers.com
> http://www.mauimakers.com/blog/thursday-public-meeting/
> 
> On Sep 15, 2012, at 6:34 PM, Paul Szymkowiak wrote:
> 
>> I have mixed feelings about the relevance of PLM as defined in the referenced wikipedia page to a hacker/ maker based approach to some notion of product, but also generally as it relates to the kinds of discovery and problem solving this SpaceGAMBIT effort is wanting to encourage. 
>> 
>> As we step towards more and more complex solutions, I think some of the PLM tools will be helpful in managing inventories of parts for projects or solutions. This will be especially useful where the tool can support complex solutions with many thousands of parts, and where distributed, parallel and collaborative solution development will occur, such as multiple teams working in parallel on subsystems as part of a larger product. If a product doesn't readily support that, it's probably of less use to us.
>> 
>> Of course, our SpaceGAMBIT projects - and probably ultimately products and services - will have life cycles, but I think good life-cycle models are largely a reflection of the underlying philosophy and culture or the people involved.
>> 
>> In my view, PLM as described in the referenced Wikipedia article, appears as a cleanly phased, sequential approach, where a product passes through a series of stage gates from concept through to use and finally disposal. Of course, these phases do describe things that happen during the life cycle of a typical product-development effort, however they aren't necessarily relevant as phases. Although the Wikipedia page mentions that LCE is iterative, the PLM defined here doesn't reflect that well. It does briefly refer to "backing up" into earlier phase, but as an experienced method author, I find it kind of sloppy when a method is idealised to a point where it doesn't suitably reflect and support reality, appears to address real world concerns by passing reality off as an exception, and then claims to be practically useful to enact PLM.
>> 
>> From a method architecture perspective, I think there is little value in having an overarching product lifecycle model that simply reflects the detailed activity that obviously needs to occur: for me, it's equivalent to having a "hammer nail" activity within a "hammer nail" phase. Phases for me need to speak to useful and important strategic goals. But more to the point, I think this type of PLM philosophy doesn't reflect the reality of PLM in exploratory, evolutionary prototyping - the very approach that makes hacker and maker spaces what they are.
>> 
>> My closing critique is that the definition here appears to be based predominantly on information drawn from the field of automotive engineering, a context  where the basic product is arguably very well understood. I tread with caution when applying methods and practices suitable in one context to different context. How much does the building of cars using standardised assembly line production have relevance to hacker/ maker creation of new products in the context of space exploration?
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Paul
>>  
>> Paul Szymkowiak 
>> 
>> 
>> On 16 September 2012 09:39, Jerry Isdale <jerry at mauimakers.com> wrote:
>> Couple very interesting Project Management talks here at 100YSS relating to this.
>> One on a product, one on use of general PMBOK to address physics advances.
>> more later.
>> 
>> Jerry Isdale
>> http://MauiMakers.com
>> http://www.mauimakers.com/blog/thursday-public-meeting/
>> 
>> On Sep 15, 2012, at 9:20 AM, cole santos wrote:
>> 
>>> Using this as a framework for developing our grant/prize structure would be useful as well. Each project will be responsible for their own management styles, by structuring the contest to support PLM we could encourage success.  Stages of competition could be as in the Wikipedia. (i added theoretical prize/grant amounts). Moving up stage wise would require previous success at a lower level to be assessed by the members/peers/backers.
>>> Conceive - Stage 1 (10-100$)
>>> Specification
>>> Concept design
>>> Design - Stage 2 (100-1000$)
>>> Detailed design
>>> Validation and analysis (simulation)
>>> Tool design
>>> Realize - Stage 3  (1000-10000$ + outside funding)
>>> Plan manufacturing
>>> Manufacture
>>> Build/Assemble
>>> Test (quality check)
>>> Service - Stage 4 (incorporation of ideas into GAMBIT superstructure)
>>> Sell and deliver
>>> Use
>>> Maintain and support
>>> Dispose
>>> 
>>> On Sun, Sep 16, 2012 at 8:36 AM, Brent Shambaugh <brent.shambaugh at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> This is a bit of a long read, but it gives some idea of what Product
>>> Lifecycle Management is:
>>> 
>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Product_lifecycle_management
>>> 
>>> I think you'll be impressed by what's out there, if you haven't seen
>>> it already. I keep thinking that stuff like this will help out in the
>>> long run. Boeing used it. See Dassault Systemes at
>>> http://www.3ds.com/.
>>> 
>>> I've started a group that is into this sort of stuff, but it may be
>>> awhile before anything cool comes out of it. I'll start digging into
>>> it more.
>>> 
>>> On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 11:50 PM, Brent Shambaugh
>>> <brent.shambaugh at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> > I like Rizzoma's semantic web ideas. I've also found a number of open
>>> > source tools in the Product Lifecycle Management arena. Aras
>>> > (http://www.aras.com/) has its own open source license and is
>>> > available for Windows. OpenPLM is available under GPLv3
>>> > (http://sourceforge.net/projects/open-source-plm/), and Sparta is
>>> > available under AGPL (https://github.com/scientia/sparta).
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 2:28 PM, Bradley Grzesiak <listrophy at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >> It's *kinda* open source. You have to ask for the source... which is kinda
>>> >> weird.
>>> >>
>>> >> :brad
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 1:35 PM, Jerry Isdale <jerry at mauimakers.com> wrote:
>>> >>>
>>> >>> "All existing communication and collaboration tools display messages
>>> >>> chronologically and in a linear way making a context fragmented and
>>> >>> difficult to comprehend.... Rizzoma allows communication within a certain
>>> >>> context permitting a chat to instantly become a document where topics of a
>>> >>> discussion organized into branches of mind-map diagram and minor details are
>>> >>> collapsed to avoid distraction."
>>> >>>
>>> >>> Free and open source. Hmmm.
>>> >>> Worth watching and checking into deeper.
>>> >>> Not sure about the 'everyone writes everywhere' model.  Sometimes you want
>>> >>> a semi-closed project, that others might comment but not edit or be hidden
>>> >>> from view.  Might be a way to do that too.  Heck it is Open Source.
>>> >>>
>>> >>> Jerry Isdale
>>> >>> http://MauiMakers.com
>>> >>> http://www.mauimakers.com/blog/thursday-public-meeting/
>>> >>>
>>> >>> On Sep 12, 2012, at 7:21 AM, Brent Shambaugh wrote:
>>> >>>
>>> >>> > Here's a collaboration tool.
>>> >>> >
>>> >>> > http://rizzoma.com/
>>> >>> >
>>> >>> > -Brent
>>> >>> > _______________________________________________
>>> >>> > SpaceProgram mailing list
>>> >>> > SpaceProgram at lists.hackerspaces.org
>>> >>> > http://lists.hackerspaces.org/mailman/listinfo/spaceprogram
>>> >>>
>>> >>> _______________________________________________
>>> >>> SpaceProgram mailing list
>>> >>> SpaceProgram at lists.hackerspaces.org
>>> >>> http://lists.hackerspaces.org/mailman/listinfo/spaceprogram
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> --
>>> >> Bradley Grzesiak
>>> >> co-founder, bendyworks
>>> >> http://bendyworks.com/
>>> >>
>>> >> _______________________________________________
>>> >> SpaceProgram mailing list
>>> >> SpaceProgram at lists.hackerspaces.org
>>> >> http://lists.hackerspaces.org/mailman/listinfo/spaceprogram
>>> >>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> SpaceProgram mailing list
>>> SpaceProgram at lists.hackerspaces.org
>>> http://lists.hackerspaces.org/mailman/listinfo/spaceprogram
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> SpaceProgram mailing list
>>> SpaceProgram at lists.hackerspaces.org
>>> http://lists.hackerspaces.org/mailman/listinfo/spaceprogram
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> SpaceProgram mailing list
>> SpaceProgram at lists.hackerspaces.org
>> http://lists.hackerspaces.org/mailman/listinfo/spaceprogram
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> SpaceProgram mailing list
>> SpaceProgram at lists.hackerspaces.org
>> http://lists.hackerspaces.org/mailman/listinfo/spaceprogram
> 
> _______________________________________________
> SpaceProgram mailing list
> SpaceProgram at lists.hackerspaces.org
> http://lists.hackerspaces.org/mailman/listinfo/spaceprogram

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.hackerspaces.org/pipermail/spaceprogram/attachments/20120916/40411554/attachment-0001.html>