NPPS Leadership Team

["Laycock, Paul" <laycock AT bnl.gov>]

My reason for suggesting Doug to lead the meeting was to give Doug an 
opportunity to lay out an SDCC-mgmt approved agenda, which he would hopefully 
push to be as open as possible about.  My issues with communication with SDCC 
have been trying to understand what they want so that we can identify the 80% 
win-win topics and focus on them.  I have a feeling that the 20% difficult 
topics take up far more strategic time than they should, while the 80% is 
practically ignored for lack of communication.

        Paul

> On 10 Mar 2021, at 17:43, Brett Viren via Phys-npps-mgmt-l 
> <phys-npps-mgmt-l AT lists.bnl.gov> wrote:
> 
> Another "me too" for Chris's words.
> 
> Especially with SDCC leaving the department (still, right?) it seems to
> me it would be more weird to have them provide NPPS leadership than to
> not.
> 
> This has nothing to do with Doug as an individual.  Until recently I've
> never interacted much with him but so far I have nothing to complain
> about (and I love complaining).
> 
> I do like the idea of starting with ad-hoc meetings with SDCC
> representation.  If they become useful enough and there is enough to
> discuss they could be made regular.  I think it would be best that these
> meetings are not "joint" but rather NPPS set the agendas.
> 
> The Thursday SDCC liaison meetings can still give an outlet for SDCC to
> push any agendas on the community.
> 
> -Brett.
> 
> 
> Torre Wenaus via Phys-npps-mgmt-l <phys-npps-mgmt-l AT lists.bnl.gov>
> writes:
> 
>> Hi all,
>> I'm regularly asked if RACF/SDCC is represented on the NPPS leadership 
>> team. When I say no I'm sometimes asked why not. I think ideally there 
>> would be good liaison connections in both directions. We
>> have our standing 'SDCC news' slot in the NPPS meeting, and regular 
>> attendance from several SDCC people including Tony, but since NPPS was 
>> formed the 'natural candidates' for liaison have not been
>> advisable ones in my view. Now perhaps that has changed with the arrival 
>> of Doug Benjamin in SDCC. He is certainly a friend of NPPS, attends our 
>> meetings and group coffees of his own volition, and sees
>> it as a goal to increase collaboration between SDCC and NPPS. He does have 
>> an earned bull-in-the-china-shop reputation, which can be good or bad 
>> depending on the circumstances. He's driven by the
>> needs of experiments and users first and foremost.
>> 
>> In the early days of NPPS planning we included a coordination team, 
>> expanding beyond the leadership team to include a wider circle of 
>> liaisons, but in practice this has seemed to me superfluous given the
>> good connections to experiments through the leadership team -- except we 
>> miss the SDCC liaison that would surely be included in such a body.
>> 
>> So finally to the point, I'm interested in your view on making Doug a 
>> member of the NPPS leadership team. I'm undecided myself as to whether 
>> it's a good idea, I will really appreciate your input. At this
>> point all leadership team members represent part of the activities and 
>> responsibilities of NPPS. An SDCC rep would be different in nature as a 
>> purely liaison role, but it could be useful to the experiments as
>> well as NPPS to have SDCC at the table, emphasising the role of the NPPS 
>> leadership team as liaison to the experiments for a spectrum of S&C topics 
>> that while focusing on software do touch on computing
>> as well.
>> 
>>   Torre
> _______________________________________________
> Phys-npps-mgmt-l mailing list
> Phys-npps-mgmt-l AT lists.bnl.gov
> https://lists.bnl.gov/mailman/listinfo/phys-npps-mgmt-l