ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVW
1
GE nameGEi nameStatusRevUTPUSERINSFilesComments UTP (all UTPS reviewed by Miguel, irrespective of who reviews the other manuals)Comments User & Progs.Comments Inst& AdminFilesObservations
2
Application MashupWirecloudRejectedManuelNOKOKOKOK* Tracing feature not on the roadmap:FIWARE.FEATURE.Apps.ApplicationMashup.SupportPushCommunicationToClientWidgetsFromServers (they may refer to FIWARE.Feature.Apps.ApplicationMashup.ApplicationCreation.SupportPushCommunicationToClientWidgetsFromServers)
* Similar situation with FIWARE.FEATURE.Apps.ApplicationMashup.CreateUIOrientedServiceComposition
* R3.2 feature not traced: FIWARE.Feature.Apps.ApplicationMashup.IDManagementSupport.IntegrationWithIDManagementSystem
* R3.2 feature not traced: FIWARE.Feature.Apps.ApplicationMashup.DevSupport.WidgetOperatorDevelopmentEnvironment 		0 - Link to Open Specification implemented
Excellent guide - congratulations!!!
Excellent guide - Congratulations!!!SAP will check if the are going ot deliver or not
3
Marketplace
Marketplace
RejectedManuelNOKNOKOKNOK* Pls remove absolute links!!
* Feature inconsistanly referred. FIWARE.Feature.Apps.Marketplace.PricingDecisionSupport.CreateMarketScenario on roadmap is traced by FIWARE.FEATURE.Apps.Marketplace.CreateMarketScenario in the UTP. Also, pay attention to lower case/upper case inconsistencies
* Same with FIWARE.FEATURE.Apps.Marketplace.SimulatePriceLevels and FIWARE.FEATURE.Apps.Marketplace.ComparePriceLevels (different names and lower/upper case)

0 - Link to Open Specification implemented by this GEI?
1 - At User Guide introduction: "We do not distinguish between user and programmers guide for its core component" - is misleading because we do.
2 - PS is not well linked to its meaning, as it is done with ABMS
3 - "It is possible to load predefined scenario files prepared with Microsoft
Excel according to the structure of the illustrative file [ attachment ]" - Where is the attachement?
4- Create resource -> indent to the left. Is there a reason for that indentation?
5- At the end, in
Using the Rating based Recommendation Component of the Marketplace, there a couple of non-working links. Are they correct?		Incorrect version number in "Information package" version. Two possible solutions (any of them very easy to implement):

1) Remove from Forge the "Information Package" (incluing the "IPack.3.1.1 FI-WARE Information Package - Marketplace.pdf" file within it).
2) Move the "IPack.3.1.1 FI-WARE Information Package - Marketplace.pdf" to its proper place (release 2.3), then remove the (now empty) "Information Package".		UTP rejected in R2: None of the Features of R2.2 traced here.
4
Mediation
Mediation
RejectedManuelNOKOKOKOK* Remove all absolute links!!!!
* Features not traced by tests:
FIWARE.Feature.Apps.Mediator.SemanticInvocation
FIWARE.Feature.Apps.Mediator.BuildServicePayload
FIWARE.Feature.Apps.Mediator.DynamicMediation
All the ones in R3.2 (apart from one that is also in R2 - MISTAKE! you cannot have the same feature in the roadmap in two releases, it seems that you have a mistake in the granularity of the backlog)

There are elementary traceability mistakes in this UTP, I feel reluctant to believe that this was seriously reviewed 		0- User Guide, why twice times the same links to the WSO and Apache
1- Some snippets get out of their boxes		UTP rejected in R2: TaskManagement.SplitAndAggregationPattern is not traced by a Test
5
Revenue Sharing
RSSRejectedManuelNOKOKOKOKTest 1 (for instance) refers to a concrete URL on a concrete location. Make it general, this manual is not for a concrete instance. This happens in more tests.

Other than that, this one is very good		0- Link to the open specifications implemented by this GEI?
1 - Shouldn't Pentaho have a link, or something?
2- Trough seems wrong - through?
OK - it looks good and complete		0- it seems good, just at the introduction it says it'll explain functionality. It's a bit misleading since this manual is not for that purpose. Am I missing anything?Check rejection from R2 on User Manual: The manual must be general, not for a concrete instance. The endpoints mentioned are concrete instances. This needs changing. Also, they talk about a "Settlement web " that I cannot see how to reach.
6
Store
Store
AcceptedManuelOKOKOKOKCommendable piece of work that we could use as an example to followOK - it looks both good and complete0 - Open source now -> update in getting the source code?
OK - it looks good and complete
UTP: rejected in R2. one Feature (ServiceConfiguration) is not traced.
7
BusinessCalculatorBusinessCalculatorRejectedMiguelNOKNOKNOKOKComment ignored from R2: Pls fix absolute links
I do not understand why this has been submitted to our review in R3.2 (both GE owner and the WP coordination) - they are not tracing the R3 features. do I have a wrong link?
In R3 I would expect that there is a REST façade (the texts talks about future promises). There is not a programmer's manual nor a "hello world" example

I am not sure if this is ok and agreed with Juanjo. Can you please explain?		* The descriptions of some sections are misleading (the guilenes express that the scenarios are not exactly the ones decribed). I took the liberty of editing them a bit
* Resource availability does not state how much memory, cpu, etc. I need to have available
* Resource consumption does not express abnormally high values of CPU, memory or hard disks are consumed. *
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98