usatlas-hllhc-l2deputymgmt-nsf-l AT lists.bnl.gov
Subject: U.S. ATLAS HL-LHC Upgrade Level 2 and Deputies-NSF only Management Mailing List
List archive
Re: [Usatlas-hllhc-l2deputymgmt-nsf-l] November VRs
- From: Gustaaf Brooijmans <gusbroo AT nevis.columbia.edu>
- To: Usatlas-hllhc-l2deputymgmt-nsf-l AT lists.bnl.gov, Andy Haas <andy.haas AT nyu.edu>
- Subject: Re: [Usatlas-hllhc-l2deputymgmt-nsf-l] November VRs
- Date: Mon, 2 Jan 2023 18:42:21 +0100
Hello all,
We’re down to 6.4.3 and 6.8.
Please do this asp.
Thx
Gustaaf
> On Dec 31, 2022, at 9:05 AM, Gustaaf Brooijmans
> <gusbroo AT nevis.columbia.edu> wrote:
>
>
> Hello all,
>
> We need to finalize the VRs today (well, a week ago), so please:
>
> -6.4.1: please submit
> -6.4.3: should indicate what fraction of the SV is attributable to each of
> the two sources listed
>
> -6.6.1: thanks for the fixes, please submit
>
> -6.8 is still missing
>
> Thanks,
>
> Gustaaf
>
>> On Dec 29, 2022, at 11:09 AM, Gustaaf Brooijmans
>> <gusbroo AT nevis.columbia.edu> wrote:
>>
>>
>> Hello all,
>>
>> A quick update:
>>
>>
>>> -6.4.1: the SV variance report is good, but the CV report is missing (and
>>> maybe there should be a CA that says rebaselining will take care of
>>> things)
>>
>> The update looks good, please submit.
>>
>>> -6.4.3 should indicate what fraction of the SV is attributable to each of
>>> the two sources listed (I have unlocked this one)
>>>
>>> -6.5.4 is missing
>>
>> Looks good, thanks!
>>
>>>
>>> -6.6 is missing
>>
>> Looks good, approved.
>>
>>> -6.6.1 the explanation for the cost variance is missing (I have unlocked
>>> it)
>>
>> Thanks for the update, but
>> "The cost variance is due to a correction that was made to the Actuals to
>> reflect invoices. This is temporary, while we are waiting for CERN
>> invoices to be processed and then paid.”
>> => we cannot have text like this in a VR as this sounds like the reason
>> for the cost variance is not having received an invoice, ie using invoices
>> instead of accruals.
>> => I have unlocked again.
>>
>>> -6.6.3: the impact statement is inconsistent with the explanation
>>
>> Thanks for the update, please submit.
>>
>>> -6.6.4 is missing
>>
>> Thanks. I’ll approve. (I note that in 6.6 you give info that’s not in
>> 6.6.4.)
>>
>>>
>>> -6.8 is missing
>>
>> Still missing.
>>
>>> -6.8.4 looks good => please submit this
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Gustaaf
>> _______________________________________________
>> Usatlas-hllhc-l2deputymgmt-nsf-l mailing list
>> Usatlas-hllhc-l2deputymgmt-nsf-l AT lists.bnl.gov
>> https://lists.bnl.gov/mailman/listinfo/usatlas-hllhc-l2deputymgmt-nsf-l
>>
>
-
Re: [Usatlas-hllhc-l2deputymgmt-nsf-l] November VRs,
Gustaaf Brooijmans, 01/02/2023
- <Possible follow-up(s)>
- Re: [Usatlas-hllhc-l2deputymgmt-nsf-l] November VRs, Gustaaf Brooijmans, 01/02/2023
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.