Notes for 12/2/08
· Summary of Issues
· Clarification of points
o Legacy Software:
· Yes. To relevant ones.
§ Things that you would like to see transferred over
· No. Take it as lessons learned.
§ Export to the legacy formats
· New point of entry, just need to export to XML/SQL. Engineers can map the spokes
§ Able to translate from legacy? Yes, that would be ideal.
§ All new products created through our application. Phasing out legacy systems.
o Questions asked and answered:
§ Can you give us a few examples of products from your current catalogs?
· Any PAETEC services, equipment rental, backup, T1s. All inclusive (like Time Warner for businesses) hosting, anything we sell, toll free number, sold software.
§ Are we able access to your Oracle database? How can we do so?
· No access to any live data.
· We will get sample data for testing info.
· No strict requirement for method of SQL output.
§ Could you give some examples of what a service, feature, attributes, etc. might be?
· More services than hardware
· Service and product are kind of synonyms. Service can mean dial tone, or an instance of a product. Service = Product.
· Service ordering digital cable
· Feature non standard or HD channels
· Attributes: which channels. Configuring blocked numbers
· MRC Monthly recurring charge
· NRC non-recurring charge
· Usage pricing is like based on use, ( 2 cents per minute)
· MRC and NRC apply to pricing and cost.
§ When exporting data to an external format, should the entire catalog of products be exported? Is it necessary to support exporting groups of products or single products?
· One at a time is the highest priority
§ When you say each entity should have its own ID are you saying that it’s unique in the product catalog and should/could be contained in multiple products?
· Spoke systems work off unique id. Doesn’t mean it has to be central, but it needs to be assigned, not the same across systems.
§ Versions of catalog, customers have different versions of the products at any given time. See differences; see changes like between 1.0 and 1.2.
§ Talk about this more detailed in future meetings.
o When we get license for blueprint it must be forwarded to non-RIT email, change to xml file when downloaded.
o Everything is a strict hierarchy. Actual entities are unique, but a template would be good. There is not a good way to share features with services, etc.
o Synopses: we can put up a product charter, expectations from RIT and PAETEC. Basic outline and expectancies.
§ They did get the license. They are monthly and will be resent licenses.
§ Call email support, but don’t want to spend a lot of time so filter trough the details.
§ Use cases, tie prototypes to them, cool features. Generate test cases off use cases.
o Other Two Metrics will be: lines of code, requirements met, use cases satisfied, or something along those lines.
o Come out to PAETEC next Tuesday at 4pm. Erika will send out an email with direction.
o The user can interact as either a web-app or stand-alone. Design part of it without a decision. Flush out both options. People using have access to network. Stand-alone makes deployment much more complex. Many of PAETEC’s current tools are web-apps.
o Set up Primary contact person. To minimize the email.
· Action Items (w/ person responsible and dues dates)
o Research Telecom
o Sign NDA
§ Assigned to Erika
§ Due 12/9
o Blueprint License
§ Assigned to Nathan
§ Due ASAP (completed)
o Project Synopses
§ Assigned to Phil
§ Due 12/5