AF:
NF:0
PS:10
SRH:1
SFN:
DSR:
MID:<20081009082531.2869b157@ripper.onstor.net>
CFG:
PT:0
S:andy.sharp@onstor.com
RQ:
SSV:onstor-exch02.onstor.net
NSV:
SSH:
R:<brian.stark@onstor.com>,<bob.miller@onstor.com>,<narayan.venkat@onstor.com>,<sandra.gallegos@onstor.com>
MAID:1
X-Sylpheed-Privacy-System:
X-Sylpheed-Sign:0
SCF:#mh/Mailbox/sent
RMID:#imap/andys@onstor.net@onstor-exch02.onstor.net/INBOX	0	BB375AF679D4A34E9CA8DFA650E2B04E0C0115E9@onstor-exch02.onstor.net
X-Sylpheed-End-Special-Headers: 1
Date: Thu, 9 Oct 2008 08:26:59 -0700
From: Andrew Sharp <andy.sharp@onstor.com>
To: "Brian Stark" <brian.stark@onstor.com>
Cc: "Bob Miller" <bob.miller@onstor.com>, "Narayan Venkat"
 <narayan.venkat@onstor.com>, "Sandra Gallegos" <sandra.gallegos@onstor.com>
Subject: Re: Web GUI proposal
Message-ID: <20081009082659.4453c67c@ripper.onstor.net>
In-Reply-To: <BB375AF679D4A34E9CA8DFA650E2B04E0C0115E9@onstor-exch02.onstor.net>
References: <BB375AF679D4A34E9CA8DFA650E2B04E0C01152F@onstor-exch02.onstor.net>
	<BB375AF679D4A34E9CA8DFA650E2B04E0C0115E9@onstor-exch02.onstor.net>
Organization: Onstor
X-Mailer: Sylpheed-Claws 2.6.0 (GTK+ 2.8.20; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

The wizards have been separated out as a follow on project for a
cluster of reasons.  I feel that planning for them at this point is
probably going to be wasted effort because most everything will change
between now and when we would start work on them.  They have to be well
defined for the programmer to implement, and much work from many parties
will have to be done in order to have those definitions.  Useable
scoping numbers aren't really possible until we have those
definitions.  Additionally, I believe that the implementation of these
wizards will be somewhat interactive, and so it makes sense to have the
GUI revamping completed before work begins on the wizards.  Lastly, I
didn't want the landscape to get too cluttered for everyone involved -
contractor, L3 people, SEs, management - while we attack the two most
important items on the agenda, namely performance and useability.

On Wed, 8 Oct 2008 22:16:05 -0700 "Brian Stark"
<brian.stark@onstor.com> wrote:

> Andy,
> 
> Looks good to me, too.  The only comment I have with going with a
> contractor is to really stay on top of the actual time vs. estimated
> time.
> 
> I'm also curious as to why there is not estimated time for the
> wizards. Are you planning to do those in-house?
> 
> 
> Brian
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bob Miller 
> Sent: Wednesday, October 08, 2008 4:35 PM
> To: Andy Sharp
> Cc: Brian Stark; Narayan Venkat; Sandra Gallegos
> Subject: RE: Web GUI proposal
> 
> Andy
> Off hand I would say it's a "no brainer". I would like to understand
> exactly what we are getting when it is completed. Please schedule some
> time with myself and Narayan
> B
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Andy Sharp 
> Sent: Wednesday, October 08, 2008 2:58 PM
> To: Bob Miller
> Cc: Brian Stark
> Subject: Re: Web GUI proposal
> 
> Really the two numbers to compare are in the orange boxes, $49k and
> $109k.  The software development only numbers (no maintenance
> costs) are in blue, and they are $29k and $65k.
> 
> 
> On Wed, 8 Oct 2008 14:45:49 -0700 "Bob Miller" <bob.miller@onstor.com>
> wrote:
> 
> > Andy
> > I assume the two number to compare are the 43K with the 64K is that
> > correct? There was a $29K number which was connected with SW
> > Development that seemed to not be connected to anything.
> > B
> > 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Andy Sharp 
> > Sent: Wednesday, October 08, 2008 2:39 PM
> > To: Bob Miller
> > Cc: Brian Stark
> > Subject: Web GUI proposal
> > 
> > Howdy,
> > 
> > Attached is a spreadsheet analyzing the cost aspect of the two
> > strategies I've come up with for persuing this project.  The two
> > are: hiring a full time progammer (New Hire); and paying a
> > contractor/consulting company to do the work, including some, maybe
> > 10-25% of the project management work. Both would utilize the HCL
> > programmer (Dhavamani) we have available to assist in the
> > programming work.
> > 
> > The contractor approach, which I did not initially consider, has two
> > very real advantages: it costs quite a lot less in the first 12
> > months, and they can start immediately, and by that I mean tomorrow.
> > I expect for all intents and puposes a new hire would be on line
> > soonest in a month.
> > 
> > I met with the head of a firm that I have had positive experience
> > with, Tridigital.  As a result of that meeting, I sent our GUI
> > related code including all the javascript to them, as well as made
> > available a filer so they could get a good look at the GUI.
> > 
> > 
> > Based on their findings, I have put together this spreadsheet that
> > summarizes the costs as well as the steps and milestones in the
> > plan. I believe we can have something internally releaseable, ie.,
> > to QA others, by January.  I have confidence that Tridigital can do
> > what we need and I recommend that approach be approved.  The can
> > start as soon as I get that approval.
> > 
> > Thanks,
> > 
> > a
> > 
> > PS.  It might go without saying, but details: Tridigital can start
> > as soon as we have a PO; they will bill against that on a monthly
> > basis based on hours worked.
