• Galal Hassan Galal (Network Co-ordinator: in the Chair)
• Anthony Finkelstein (Network Director)
• Daniel Berry (Co-ordinator External nodes)
• Bashar Nuseibeh (Coordinator A, S, Ge, Ir, UK)
• David Cornwell (Project Officer, CEC)
• Jose Fiadeiro (Coordinator It, Gr, Sp, P)
• Kevin Ryan (Chair of Research Coordination Committee)

• Janis Bubenko (Co-ordinator D, F, No, Sw)
• Roel Wieringa (Co-ordinator B, L, Ne, F)
• Carlo Ghezzi (Representing the Chair of Infrastructure Committee)
• Barbara Farbey (Industrial Liaison)
• Michael Goedicke (Chair of Research Training Committee)
• Wolfgang Emmerich (Infrastructure Co-ordinator)
• Paul Gough (Chair of Ind. & Tech. Committee)

The previous minutes were agreed, after minor amendments suggested by DC and BN.

2.1 RENOIR support for RE99.

2.2 Participation at ICSE’99.

3.1. ACWF reported that there has been a good level of networking activity during the past quarter.

Applications for membership have been received from

4.1 LSR-IMAG, France.

The Co-ordinator tabled the completed membership form, and the comments received from the Area Co-ordinator, Roel Wieringa, who recommended accepting the application.

After discussion, it was agreed that the proposed institution had a good level of relevant activity, and that LSR-IMAG would be admitted to the membership of the Network. The Co-ordinator is to progress the application as per the current procedures. ACTION: GHG

5.1 Bids approved by the Director since the last meeting were tabled. 17 bids had been made, totalling approximately 17.5 K Euro.

5.2 A bid for equipment (a laptop, for 3500 Euro) from Nicole Levy (PRISM and Nancy, Centre de Recherche en Informtique) was discussed. There was some concern as to whether the laptop will be used for Network business. DC voiced the view that the Commission will be unhappy about setting a precedent for number of similar equipment being purchased for Network members, rather than the Contractor and its Network administration team. After some discussion it was agreed that Wolfgang Emmerich (as Infrastructure Co-ordinator) would be delegated to make further inquiries as to the nature of the need and proposed use of the laptop, and that the Board will be asked to decide after the circulation of his report. ACTION: WE

5.3 The budget was discussed and accepted as tabled.

6.1 Roadmap and Roadshow.

ACWF reported that Andrea Zisman continued to look at emerging standards of Requirements Engineering exchange between research groups.

As to the Roadmap activity, ACWF reported that roadmaps were obtained from other networks. Andrea Zisman will be asked to contact the CREWS project team to look at the industrial survey that CREWS conducted. The Roadmap will involve setting up specific technological targets. It is envisaged that the Roadmap will be completed by the end of May 1999.

Two short documents were tabled on the current team’s vision of the Roadmap and Roadshow activities. The Board was requested to consider these and give feedback to the individuals in charge (Andrea Zisman <A.Zisman@cs.ucl.ac.uk> for the Roadmap and Sofia Guerra <S.Guerra@cs.ucl.ac.uk> for the Roadshow). ACTION: All

6.2 Research training.

No further updates to what was reported in the last (8th) Board meeting.

6.3 Industrial liaison

A document summarizing the current situation as regards Industrial Liaison was tabled. ACWF commented that the industrial visits programme has been progressing very well, with visited nodes being appreciative of being visited by RENOIR people. He also reported that a Delphi survey (conducted by Barbara Farbey) is providing a source of issues for the Roadmap and Roadshow initiatives. Barbara Farbey is currently also involved in Technology Transfer debates taking place within the collective forum of the European Nodes of Excellence.

6.4 Infrastructure and Network communications

GHG reported that the revised form of the Web pages is now functional, and that both the content and interface are subject to continual update and improvement.

6.5 North American RENOIR

ACWF reported that a meeting involving RENOIR members who might constitute the core of a sister RENOIR network in North America has taken place at the same venue as this meeting. The meeting was attended by DC, ACWF, DB, BN, GHG and Steve Easterbrook, Scott Overmyer, John Mylopolous, Steve Fickas, and Sol Greenspan. The following are the notes taken on that meeting.

The group is keen on forming a group connected to RENOIR. It was agreed that this connection will give its members leverage in discussing funding opportunities with relevant organizations. The connection will also enable its members to plug into the knowledge of other researchers in the area, including those in Europe. However, the way in which the case is to be argued needs to be different in Canada and the States. This is because of differences in how big funding organizations there operate (compared to Europe) and due to the fact that Software Engineering and its branches are not perceived to be the core issues. It was commented that re-packaging of RE issues into Information Systems Strategy, Organizational, and Interactive systems and the like may be wise, as this is where the interest of people at the level that can make big-funding decision lies. It was also noted that the formation of a prestigious nuclear node will be particularly beneficial.

A core working group, comprising present American and Canadian RENOIR members present, was formed for the purposes of:

6.5.1 Co-ordinating further efforts in the direction of creating such a network, including the formation of a lobbying organization.

6.5.2 Thinking of ways to package and sell RE issues and ideas in North America to stimulate interest.

6.5.3 Seeking and approaching potential funding sources (it was suggested that Victoria Stavridou (from SRI, not present at the meeting) is contacted for advice on this matter).

RENOIR pledged its support for such a putative network, including for example the exchange of expertise on Networking matters, training and other material including the Roadshow. ACWF undertook to write to the NSF in support of the idea if needed.

6.6 Research Co-ordination.

6.6.1 It was noted that some form of RENOIR support for doctoral student participation at RE’99 was agreed. It was also reported that similar support for attendance at ICSE’99 was under consideration. DC pointed out that an entire unit at the Commission was set up for systematic action in the area of training and its methods.

6.6.2 ACWF and GHG reported that approaches were made to INCOSE (John Mead, Administrator to the UK Chapter) as regards RENOIR’s formal affiliation to INCOSE, results are currently awaited.

6.6.3 It was noted that there was a direct (and undesired) clash between RE’99 and INCOSE’99 timings. ACWF will write to all RENOIR nodes stressing the importance of achieving a common calendar and of cross-harmonizing dates amongst their various activities, with RENOIR acting as a broker. ACTION: ACWF

 None.

 8. Calendar and future meetings

 It was decided to hold the next (10th) meeting of the Executive Board in conjunction with RE’99 conference in Limerick, Ireland, on 11th June PM.

 The 11th meeting of the Executive Board is to be held in conjunction with the ESEC meetings in Toulouse, France, 6-10 September 1999 (exact time and date is to be advised).

 9. AOB/ Matters arising

 9.1 KR indicated that he will be bidding for RENOIR’s support for RE’99.

9.2 It was suggested that RENOIR might rent a stall at both ICSE’99 and INCOSE’99 conferences.

9.3 BN reported that further £4K are going to be requested from RENOIR for the CEIRE’98 event. It was noted that the CEIRE’98 event should have been profitable, and that RENOIR will fulfil its sponsorship commitment after a careful look at the full accounts, and after a debriefing report has been received on the experience so as to benefit similar future events.