Difference between revisions of "Software Technology Readiness"

From Earth Science Information Partners (ESIP)
 
Line 3: Line 3:
  
 
Current Technology Readiness Level (TRL) definitions are largely considered to be unusable for software projects and for integration of HW and SW.
 
Current Technology Readiness Level (TRL) definitions are largely considered to be unusable for software projects and for integration of HW and SW.
 
 
The other motivation is driving improvements in way we put things together to create an operational capability.
 
The other motivation is driving improvements in way we put things together to create an operational capability.
 
 
  
 
Goals/Outputs
 
Goals/Outputs
  
 
To produce formal documentation (guidance, formal recommendations or another artifact artifact/model) which clearly addresses the lack of information related to software technology readiness.
 
To produce formal documentation (guidance, formal recommendations or another artifact artifact/model) which clearly addresses the lack of information related to software technology readiness.
 
 
The recent Operational Readiness Guidance (ORL) guidance [0] produced by the ESIP Disasters Lifecycle Cluster is a good example of how this kind of thing doesn’t need to be overly complex as long as the intent is clearly communicated and suitably purposed… which current guidance is not!
 
The recent Operational Readiness Guidance (ORL) guidance [0] produced by the ESIP Disasters Lifecycle Cluster is a good example of how this kind of thing doesn’t need to be overly complex as long as the intent is clearly communicated and suitably purposed… which current guidance is not!
  

Latest revision as of 14:06, February 5, 2020

Motivation

Current Technology Readiness Level (TRL) definitions are largely considered to be unusable for software projects and for integration of HW and SW. The other motivation is driving improvements in way we put things together to create an operational capability.

Goals/Outputs

To produce formal documentation (guidance, formal recommendations or another artifact artifact/model) which clearly addresses the lack of information related to software technology readiness. The recent Operational Readiness Guidance (ORL) guidance [0] produced by the ESIP Disasters Lifecycle Cluster is a good example of how this kind of thing doesn’t need to be overly complex as long as the intent is clearly communicated and suitably purposed… which current guidance is not!

[0] https://www.esipfed.org/orl

News

  • Latest News 1
  • Latest News 2


Archive

Activities

Get Involved

  • Contact Chair:
    • Lewis McGibbney, Chair
    • Kel Markert, Co-Chair

Resources