D4.4.2 REPORT ON NETWORKING WITH FI-PPP ECOSYSTEM May 2016 This document provides an overview on networking activities of EuropeanPioneers with the FI-PPP ecosystem. Networking activities mainly contain memberships of bodies, boards and consortiums of FI-PPP projects and organisations, organisation of and participation in FI-PPP and other joint events as well as all other regular activities with projects, groups etc. related to the FI-PPP. PU - Public This document is a deliverable of the European Pioneers project supported by the European Commission under its FP7 research-funding programme, and contributes to the FI-PPP (Future Internet Public Private Partnership) initiative.
DELIVERABLE DETAILS [Full project title]: Expansion of Media Content Use Cases: Exploiting Content- Technologies in Multimedia Products [Short project title]: ExpaMeco (aka. EuropeanPioneers) [Grant agreement number]: 632871 [WP n ]: WP4: Dissemination and liaison with FI-PPP [Deliverable n ]: D4.4.2 [Deliverable title]: Report on networking with FI-PPP ecosystem (2nd iteration) [Deliverable nature]: Report (R) [Dissemination level]: Public (PU) [Contractual delivery date]: M24 May 2016 [Actual delivery date]: 13 July 2016 [Editor]: Peter Muryshkin, Fraunhofer IAIS [Internal Reviewers]: Laura Kohler, etventure EuropeanPioneers D4.4.2 V1.0 May 2016 Page 2 of 15
LIST OF AUTHORS Organisation Fraunhofer IAIS Fraunhofer IAIS European Innovation Hub GmbH Author Peter Muryshkin peter.muryshkin@iais.fraunhofer.de Heike Horstmann heike.horstmann@iais.fraunhofer.de Laura Kohler laura.kohler@etventure.com EuropeanPioneers D4.4.2 V1.0 May 2016 Page 3 of 15
TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF AUTHORS... 3 TABLE OF CONTENTS... 4 1 - INTRODUCTION... 5 2 - COMMUNICATION AND NETWORKING ACTIVITIES AND THEIR RESULTS... 6 2.1 - Boards and Projects... 6 2.2 - Overview of Activities... 6 2.3 - Joint events and activities... 7 2.4 - Details and insights on above activities... 8 2.4.1 - A16 Tech Round Table activities... 8 2.4.2 - Communication with the FIWARE coach... 9 2.4.3 - Sharing of project output with other Enabler projects... 10 2.4.4 - Accompany Enabler application by Appscend... 11 2.4.5 - LinkedIN group for FIWARE experts... 12 2.4.6 - Review of FIWARE Service Desk communication and final recommendations... 13 2.4.7 - Review of reports and best practices recommendations for another Accelerator... 14 3 - SUMMARY... 15 EuropeanPioneers D4.4.2 V1.0 May 2016 Page 4 of 15
1 - INTRODUCTION This document provides an overview on networking activities of EuropeanPioneers with the FI-PPP ecosystem within the second 12 months of the project. This includes memberships in boards, organisations and other projects of the FI-PPP, but also any other (mainly) regular exchange with other organisations, groups and projects within the FI-PPP. Furthermore, participation and organisation of common events of the FI-PPP and joint events of EuropeanPioneers with one or more other projects of the FI-PPP are listed. Objectives of most activities were the dissemination of the EuropeanPioneers Open Calls, information and support related to the FIWARE ecosystem as well as the efficient organisation of and exchange between the 16 Accelerator programmes (A16), FIWARE and EuropeanPioneers. EuropeanPioneers D4.4.2 V1.0 May 2016 Page 5 of 15
2 - COMMUNICATION AND NETWORKING ACTIVITIES AND THEIR RESULTS 2.1 - Boards and Projects The project partners of EuropeanPioneers are also members or contributors of the following boards and projects related to FI-PPP. Table 1: Boards and Projects Organisation or Project Partner or Person Objectives Activities and Results A16 FI-PPP Steering Board Committee European Innovation Hub (mainly), Fraunhofer IAIS (technical topics) Fraunhofer IAIS (as an advisor), European Innovation Hub (as participant) Networking and exchange, making use of synergies, common projects (such as VIP program) Networking, exchange, analysis supporting decisions, communication, taking actions FIWARE Lab Fraunhofer IAIS Networking, exchange, recommendations ihub.eu (I3H) European Networking, exchange, Innovation Hub promotion of FIWARE, (as participant at common acceleration I3H project and projects, common events, as founding common business member of ihub.eu-network) Sharing best practices, bringing different initiatives together Regular exchange, more collaboration and strategic sustainability concepts in software technology context System acceptance tests Stargate Innovation Day (promotion of FIWARE and Fiware-startups); ihub.eu EEIG (common entity for a sustainable incubator network) 2.2 - Overview of Activities The project partners of EuropeanPioneers are in contact and regular exchange with the following other projects and programmes within the FI-PPP. Table 2: Overviews of Activities Organisation or Project Partner or Person Objectives Activities and Results FIWARE Fraunhofer IAIS Organise technical FIWARE training and support for Open Calls and selected SMEs Got FIWARE JIRA access for support request status Regular calls with FIWARE coach and other FIWARE experts EuropeanPioneers D4.4.2 V1.0 May 2016 Page 6 of 15
Organisation or Project Partner or Person Objectives Activities and Results FICORE Fraunhofer IAIS Join the internal QA meeting in Sevilla on April 27 th /28 th 2016 Discuss quality improvement roadmap and quality label architecture European Innovation Hub via ihub.eu Bounty Hunting project started in February 2016 European Innovation Hub plays an active role within ihub together with IPN (Portugal) StartupYard Fraunhofer IAIS Review of exemplary teams reports to generate further best practice recommendations Promoting the bounty project rewarding FIWARE improvements done by independent developers For details, see 2.4.8 -. FI-Business European Innovation Hub Constant exchange with FI- Business team Laura Kohler (European Innovation Hub) was speaker at a panel at Games Week (Initiative by FI-Business) 2.3 - Joint events and activities The following joint events respectively joint activities at these events were organised or supported by EuropeanPioneers in collaboration with one or more other projects or programmes related to the FI-PPP. Table 3: Joint events and activities Date Event, City, Country FI-PPP projects or Organisations, Partner or Person Major objectives May 27 th 2015 June 9 th 2015 FIWARE Tech Camp in Dublin FIWARE Tech Camp in Warsaw Thought Box / National Digital Research Centre, Fraunhofer IAIS FIWARE, FIcontent2, Weblify, Fraunhofer IAIS, IMPACT, INCENSe Talk about FIWARE mission and capabilities, attract teams for the Accelerator program Inform about FIWARE, FIcontent2 and EuropeanPioneers November 4 th to 6 th 2015 ECFI European Conference on the Future Internet in Hamburg FI-PPP / SpeedUP!Europe (A16 Accelerator) Meet and network with FIWARE leaders, join the steering committee and discuss the quality strategy. Participate in the jury board to evaluate series of startups. EuropeanPioneers D4.4.2 V1.0 May 2016 Page 7 of 15
Date Event, City, Country FI-PPP projects or Organisations, Partner or Person Major objectives January 27th to 2016 FIWARE / A16 partners A16 meeting in Milan Exchange, common activities (such as FIWARE VIP program) March 18 th 2016 FIWARE Tech FAQ webinar (online event) StartupYard / CIVITTA (A16 Accelerator) Presentation and open discussion about FIWARE with programme members August 26th, September 18th, March 23th 2016 FIWARE/A16 partners A16 Tech Round Table series Meet colleagues from other Accelerator programs and exchange on common issues 2.4 - Details and insights on above activities This section provides more details and insights on the activities mentioned above which we consider worth mentioning. - A16 Tech Round Table activities; - Communication with the FIWARE coach; - Sharing of project output with other Enabler owners - Accompany Enabler application by Appscend (EuropeanPioneers team of the first batch); - LinkedIN group for FIWARE experts; - Review of Help Desk communication and final recommendations; - Review of reports and best practices recommendations for another Accelerator. 2.4.1 - A16 Tech Round Table activities The methodological approach of an EU project features high-level concepts giving much room for specific layout and execution. Given that this project and specifically the task connected to this deliverable focuses on a scientific approach, the 16 Accelerator projects is from this point of view a 16-fold experiment with more or less similar setup. After the first iterations with lessons learned at hand, we considered useful to establish a communication channel with our Accelerator peers. The goal was to shed light on their findings and to distil an extended and shareable set of best practices. While platform and event promotion is a well perceivable FIWARE activity, the vision was to dive into more detail regarding technical expertise, which came out highly desired by the SMEs additionally to the provided coach interface. For this purpose, we used an informal adaptation of the Voice of the Customer approach 1. In cooperation with SpeedUp!Europe, we reached out to all 16 Accelerators and managed to prepare and setup an online conference with a detailed agenda addressing A16 assembly goals, current issues and open questions. In two sessions, ten of sixteen Accelerators delegated their representatives focusing on technical aspects of FIWARE, followed by a fruitful discussion. We shared and discussed its outcomes in form of a mission statement to FIWARE from a condensed customer s perspective, a Phase 3 SME. 1 Kay Yang, 2007. Voice of the Customer: Capture and Analysis (Six SIGMA Operational Methods) EuropeanPioneers D4.4.2 V1.0 May 2016 Page 8 of 15
The main identified priorities and recommendations in course of this consideration have been the quality of Enabler Dockerfiles, model based functional testing and automated assessment of online documentation quality. We held the follow-up and simultaneously the final A16 Tech Round Table closer to the programme end. This time, only three Accelerator colleagues joined the online conference; FIWARE representatives took part as well. The main topic was missing information on availability of commercial FIWARE nodes, which had been initially scheduled for March 2016, and is still largely unknown for five of the six planned nodes as of time as this report was written (May 2016). Please check the official FIWARE announcement for the institutions aiming to offer these services and possible updates 2. From one of the mentioned partners, Netzlink GmbH, we got an unofficial estimation that their commercial node would go live as of August 2016. Outcomes Please find attached reports and protocols accompanying these activities as separate documents. We found that the interest on this activity appears moderate to low, and that having an on board technical expert with high availability for the Phase 3 teams has not been mandatory for the consortium design. We published results of the final meeting on the official FIWARE community online platform, https://fiwarecommunity.mobilize.io/, and offered the community to vote for a regular meeting like this, but only 455 of 1400 members viewed our message, about 80 downloaded the reported and just 3 voted for a technical meeting. Additionally, we submitted insights from this exchange as FIWARE JIRA Service Desk ticket ID TCOR- 47, which we address in more detail in section 2.4.7 -. 2.4.2 - Communication with the FIWARE coach By project design, FIWARE provided us with a coach serving as interface for in-deep SMEs questions about FIWARE we would not be able to address by ourselves. Coach s mission contained also supporting escalations in case of quality of service issues with FIWARE Help Desk and/or Enabler developers. In course of the last 12 months in the project, we experienced two phases of collaboration with FIWARE coaches, as during autumn 2016 the coach passed his role to another colleague. During the first collaboration, we made very good experiences with the coach, especially in cases where many things did not work well. The coach was usually available via mobile phone for urgent requests, and regular communication took place, often on a weekly base. A mailbox retrospective shows almost 100 responses received in that time. The availability of the other coach was recognizably low, and the contact fully seized in April; however, in the second iteration we built on our learning and were less dependent on the coach to proceed by our own. Outcomes We conclude that placing a colleague with experience from the very beginning of the project is an excellent strategy, which needs a more sustainable way of management. The pass over of a colleague 2 https://www.fiware.org/fiware-labs-nodes-support-open-call-update-feb2016/ Retrieved on May 26 th 2016. EuropeanPioneers D4.4.2 V1.0 May 2016 Page 9 of 15
has to be systematic as best practice, or even better is to uphold capacity of same person for the whole project lifetime, as the relationship and impression is set, also towards SMEs. Best learning was to handle applications of SMEs in a technically concise way, namely along with motivational elements of their applications we obliged applicants to present a rough architecture design with FIWARE Enablers of interest. The knowledge of the coach allowed him to qualify the application on a range between unserious and well elaborated resulting in a rapid and very efficient selection process. 2.4.3 - Sharing of project output with other Enabler projects In D3.2.2, we reported in largely more detail than presented here our work with the second batch teams. There, we asked their developers to contribute to the work of the community by testing FIWARE Enablers in their real-work scenarios and providing tutorial-like examples and demonstrations. Our expectation was that noticeable and useful contributions are worth to submit as an online learning component to increase technology attractiveness and easiness of adaptation for new developers joining the community. After final acceptance tests for teams contributions, we identified that following contributions qualify to our criteria and created the following GitHub tickets by Enabler (or in some cases FIWARE JIRA tickets in case the issue tracker on GitHub was deactivated): - GE CKAN : functional smoketest and Docker based demo with a usage example o Resource : https://github.com/iais4ep/fiware/tree/master/ge/ge_ckan o Request : https://github.com/ckan/ckan/issues/3052 - GE KeyRock : contribution of a web based UI showcase as to-go Docker environment o Resource : https://github.com/iais4ep/fiware/tree/master/ge/ge_keyrock/web%20client%20t esting%20app o Request: https://github.com/ging/fiware-idm/issues/54 - GE Object Storage : web based show case demonstrating image transactions with the API, with Dockerfile o Resource : https://github.com/iais4ep/fiware/tree/master/ge/ge_object_storage/sample o Request: https://jira.fiware.org/browse/help-6663 - GE Spago BI example showcase with Docker integration: o Resource : https://github.com/iais4ep/fiware/tree/master/ge/ge_spagobi o Request : https://jira.fiware.org/browse/help-6659 - GE IoT Broker : IoT demo scenario o Resource : https://github.com/iais4ep/fiware/tree/master/ge/ge_iotbroker o Request : https://github.com/aeronbroker/aeron/issues/5 - GE CEP / Proton : IoT machine/raspberri Pi setup, communicating with the Enabler o Resource : https://github.com/iais4ep/fiware/tree/master/ge/ge_proton_cep o Request : https://github.com/ishkin/proton/issues/39 EuropeanPioneers D4.4.2 V1.0 May 2016 Page 10 of 15
Outcomes The only final response available as of time writing this report is on GE KeyRock, where the responsible contact rejected our proposal for contribution (source is same URL as above): We did check your showcase, and found it rather interesting. Unfortunately, I'm afraid we currently don't merge this kind of contributions. We hope you still want to keep it in your repo, in case anyone in the community finds it useful. So thanks again for your contribution! 2.4.4 - Accompany Enabler application by Appscend FIWARE postulates its mission as to build an open sustainable ecosystem around public, royaltyfree and implementation-driven software platform standards that will ease the development of new Smart Applications in multiple sectors 3. There is also a well-defined application process for contributors in place as part of the overall Governance Model 4. One of the companies of the first batch in our Accelerator program, Appscend Inc. 5, proposed to introduce its new software solution, telepat.io 6 as a real-time data API. Our team accompanied the application process in form of coordinating online calls and sending reminders to both sides. November 2015: introduced Appscend team with the formal application process March 2016: online discussion with the Appscend team and a FIWARE representative April 2016: FIWARE considers telepat to overlap with other Enablers (esp. Orion), therefore suggests implementing scenarios integrating with already existing Enablers. May 2016: internally, FIWARE works on the decision to submit this proposal formally to the FIWARE committee. Outcomes The idea to have an incubation phase for open source projects is a best practice for an open public platform, established for example by the Apache community since 2002 7. Retrospectively, we have the impression that either the application process does not have high priority on both sides, or there is a serious lack of capacity. We cannot judge how many other applications like this reached FIWARE, an insider commented on our request that there are no others. To compare with the Apache community, their Incubator received about 260 applications during its history and currently withholds about 60 applications 8. We have communicated a final statement to both parties, advising them to provide an API specification and formally assess the possible functional overlap. 3 FIWARE About us. https://www.fiware.org/about-us/ Retrieved on May 24 th 2016. 4 GEs Lifecycle Management https://www.fiware.org/fiware-governance/#chapter4_8 Retrieved on May 24 th 2016. 5 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/appscend Retrieved on May 24 th 2016. 6 http://telepat.io/ Retrieved on May 24 th 2016. 7 http://incubator.apache.org/projects/ Retrieved on May 24 th 2016. 8 http://incubator.apache.org/history/index.html Retrieved on May 24 th 2016. EuropeanPioneers D4.4.2 V1.0 May 2016 Page 11 of 15
2.4.5 - Establishing the ihub.eu EEIG As one of the A16 FIWARE accelerators, EuropeanPioneers decided to make use of this status by applying for the I3H project and becoming an Internet innovation Hub featured by the project. The goal of this project was to (a) support the legal entities running the accelerators (such as e.g. European Innovation Hub as coordinator of EuropeanPioneers) as innovation hubs and (b) building a sustainable network of accelerators that support startups using FIWARE. After the first six months of the project the hubs of this group decided to go for sustainability pretty early and to establish a legal entity. This was done in October 2015: the ihub.eu EEIG was born. In cooperation with 11 other hubs, the EEIG was established with four liable members and seven non-liable members. This group decided to go after common business in future, to establish softlanding activities for startups and to join forces for e.g. promoting FIWARE. Therefore, the network was chosen by FICORE to run the Bounty hunting project that was designed to motivate developers to improve certain FIWARE technologies. Outcomes On ihub.eu the complete service portfolio, the list f all members as well as the FIWARE-related activities are described. The EEIG applied for new EU projects related to FIWARE and established statutes and bylaws with the goal to maintain a sustainable network in future. External members can apply for becoming a liable- or non-liable member, or can join as associated members. The network and the creation of the EEIG is a great example for the strong network of startup supporters that was brought together during the FIWARE accelerator program. 2.4.6 - LinkedIN group for FIWARE experts Assuming future growth and acceptance of FIWARE technologies, we considered that this new ecosystem would create new jobs. Therefore, there could be a demand for FIWARE experts and need for a place to search for them. The official FIWARE community is mostly accessible only for registered and signed in users as of time writing this report. Because LinkedIN is a network with millions of members with stable operation record, we decided to establish a LinkedIN group and invite individuals who have demonstrated their technical expertise and some other relevant key players from the ecosystem. Additionally, this group should become a touch point from the LinkedIN platform to navigate to the FIWARE FAQ site or the official community site. We created the LinkedIN group: https://www.linkedin.com/groups/8464480 and invited relevant known individuals as described above. Outcomes From about 20 invited individuals, nine joined. Since then, the group shows no activity record. We assume that those who offer FIWARE related jobs either not yet exist or reach out to experts using other resources. EuropeanPioneers D4.4.2 V1.0 May 2016 Page 12 of 15
2.4.7 - Review of FIWARE Service Desk communication and final recommendations During our activities to support Phase 3 teams we recognized, that FIWARE could not meet expectations of many teams due to a series of organizational root causes on the quality management side. Therefore, we provided a series of change requests going deeper than our formal responsibility on the project, because the situation was unfortunately often inacceptable. During the last 12 months of the projects, we submitted 20 support tickets, from total 70 during the whole project (counting only direct ticket submission). Assessments and tests behind these tickets, which are worth mentioning, are: - Request for default longer SSH sessions as built-in VM configuration - Improving virtual network speed - Missing GitHub links in the FIWARE Catalogue Finally, we submitted a recommendation list for future improvements (ticket ID TCOR 147, largely based on outcomes from the A16 Technical Round Table, described formerly in this document). Outcomes 97% of our submitted tickets were processed with different runtimes. Compared to the first project half, noticeable improvements took place, for example, standard and stable monitoring of FIWARE nodes and Dockerfiles for Enablers were introduced. Reflecting these crucial improvements, in the second project half, our liaison with the FIWARE Lab became less intensive. Our final inputs for the continuous improvement process are (ticket ID TCOR 147): Regarding FIWARE Lab: - introduce a live dashboard displaying available Enabler APIs per-node with version number information - Lab: introduce an end-to-end simulation of reference node setup Regarding FIWARE Enablers: - introduce Dockerfiles to enable easy early access (seems to be mostly done, also with good community support) - introduce automated functional and performance testing for recent and future releases - introduce automated security acceptance/penetration testing for recent and future releases - automate Enabler Catalogue quality control - introduce on-release automated Quality Labels based on scores coming from a SDLC pipeline Quality Gates, based on test automation as QA intelligence layer - introduce a live dashboard to track GitHub repositories of Enablers to support release management - introduce quality labels similar to the EU Energy Label 9, rendering Enablers to have gradations of quality regarding different properties referenced as from A to G level. 9 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/european_union_energy_label Retrieved on May 24th 2016. EuropeanPioneers D4.4.2 V1.0 May 2016 Page 13 of 15
2.4.8 - Review of reports and best practices recommendations for another Accelerator We got very positive feedback from the joint activity with Civitta/StartupYard on a FAQ round for Phase 3 teams in March 2016; therefore it was a pleasure to receive another request from them to support their teams with a sneak review of their reports and to share best practices. They were looking for a reviewer, who could give feedback to developers and enhance the use of enablers for the final evaluation. The idea was to read two or three reports and write down some comments and guidelines, which could be shared with all teams and becoming instrumental to everyone. The requested activity was scheduled during the writing of this report, so it appeared to be a nice wrap-up and final contribution to the project, and we accepted the offer. StartupYard shared with us three report drafts and an appendix, all content anonymized and confidential. Even though these documents were drafts only, we were asked to look at them from a view of an evaluator to put our comments, what we would evaluate with low/high scoring and give recommendations. Finally, some concise guidelines of common advice and suggestions for the evaluated teams were desirable. On receiving our results, the Accelerator would share with all teams to learn from our feedback. The teams providing their reports had agreed to provide the expertise in such a form to the other teams. Outcomes We delivered a review of three exemplary reports and provided as requested a concise guide following the best practices. Specifically, we advised teams to prepare this type of reports following an internal team interview procedure, or at least a four eyes double check. EuropeanPioneers D4.4.2 V1.0 May 2016 Page 14 of 15
3 - SUMMARY As discussed in this report, we used the designated capacity to establish contact to surrounding organizations and partners. Besides time invested in pure presence and exchange, we also established the A16 Tech Round Table initiative, with good and partly controversial outcomes. We have talked to many motivated people, but the overall impression is that there is no concise business technology strategy behind FIWARE. Further, the FIWARE ecosystem seems to support and attract more individuals interested in technology marketing than in creating industrial technology solutions. Our insight here is that talented engineers have become highly paid workforce in the industrial domain, and even junior specialists can easily start their industrial career, so that financial salary limitations in EC projects render these jobs as not competitive. Therefore, we consider that seasoned and potent senior professionals with experience in contributing to competitive high-tech products are rather rare in the public ecosystem. The actual challenge to politics might be therefore how to attract these high talents to public projects. EuropeanPioneers D4.4.2 V1.0 May 2016 Page 15 of 15