[Olympus] Completing the TDR

[Inti Lehmann]

Dear Richard,

Ok, there may be a misunderstanding here. If this is meant as a document for internal use only, my comments are not really valid.

My understanding was that we were to produce a TDR as a public reference document, and would just use the internal document of the review as (almost complete) basis. This is what was done at all CERN experiments and what we are doing at FAIR. Then we should indeed have an author list upfront, and it should contain everyone participating actively (probably more people than in the list in Sec. 8.1). I would then also propose to upload it to the archive for proper referencing.

I, honestly, would prefer the latter option. In particular, as it may take quite some time (if ever) to produce a technical paper we could all refer to. 

If we follow the first option, I don't really understand why we want to have an updated review documentation if there is no further review. For reference I would simply have the two(?) reviewed versions password protected somewhere in our directories. If we want to have a document with the date of this summer, to my mind, we need to at least update Sec. 8 in all parts. We have agreed on responsibilities which are not reflected in the version I found. I will try to send you an update on names asap. I would  definitely vote to protect it by a password as well. That's at least my opinion.

Cheers,
Inti


On 7 Jul 2010, at 17:05, Richard G Milner wrote:

> Dear Inti,
> Thank you for your comments. The deadline of July 16th can be extended. Individual contributors should ask for an extension beyond that date.  With
> respect to the two specific issues you raised, let me address them
> individually:
> 
> 1. The author list for the TDR is contained in section 8.1. Do I understand you
> to mean that you wish to have this list up front?
> 
> 2. The material in Chapter 8 is essential to making a credible design of the
> experiment. It belongs in the TDR which is an internal document of the
> collaboration and DESY but shared with reviewers as required. It is not a
> document which we publish but we have kept it on our public web site.
> Personally, I see nothing sensitive in it but, if desired, it could be
> protected by password.  Each group should update its responsibilities, costs,
> and personnel list. Uwe is updating the schedule. If you need more time beyond
> July 16th, just let me know.
> 
> with best regards,
> Richard
> 
> Quoting Inti Lehmann <i.lehmann at physics.gla.ac.uk>:
> 
>> Hi again Richard,
>> 
>> You know that I agree with you that we should finalise this document and call it our one-and-only TDR soon. Unfortunately, there are major issues why I cannot agree to just call it final as is, namely the missing author list and Chapter 8.
>> 
>> To my mind we need an author list and cannot just refer to a changing webpage.
>> 
>> I would think that most of Chapter 8 should not be in a TDR (except the schedule). Costs are confidential, manpower is something which is rightfully assessed in a review, but one should not quote this estimates in a public document and, in particular, they don't have their place in a technical one. Furthermore all these assignments and numbers would badly need to be updated. So, I would vote for leaving them out. Else we need to agree on revised numbers, names, and assignments before this is finalised.
>> 
>> Sorry to say that but, to my mind, it may be difficult to finalise the document in only 10 days from now.
>> 
>> Cheers,
>> Inti
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On 6 Jul 2010, at 14:29, Richard G Milner wrote:
>> 
>>> Dear OLYMPUS colleagues,
>>> I would like to set Friday July 16th as the deadline for submission of revisions
>>> and new material for inclusion in the OLYMPUS TDR. At the last meeting, I
>>> understood that the following revisions were planned
>>> 
>>> - slow controls: A. Izotov RECEIVED
>>> - DORIS section: F. Brinker
>>> - Schedule: U. Schneekloth
>>> - GEM tracker: D. Hasell
>>> - Lumi monitor: M. Kohl IN PROGRESS
>>> - Figure in physics section: M. Kohl IN PROGRESS
>>> 
>>> The sense at the last meeting was the collaboration would like to see the
>>> document finalized.  Further revisions to the technical design of the
>>> experiment should be written as OLYMPUS technical notes.
>>> 
>>> with best regards,
>>> Richard
>>> 
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Olympus mailing list
>>> Olympus at mit.edu
>>> http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/olympus
>> 
>> 
> 
>