Review & Update Transition Requirements

[mheadd]

In Section 3.04, the transition requirements need to be reviewed and possibly updated.

[randyhart]

We've found on other projects that the transition requirements might be a bit over the top, documentation-wise. We should consider including less onerous requirements. Here's the latest iteration on transition requirements from an 18F RFP with the Forest Service. https://github.com/18F/its70-fs-epermit-scale-up/blob/master/solicitation-documents/Draft-RFP.md#27-transition-activities

I think this one should probably be assigned to @mheadd and @DanaPenner

[mheadd]

it seems like the language requiring a final report from the vendor might be a bit excessive - OCS will have a backlog of tasks with a record of what was completed, and what wasn't

I do like the requirement in the current draft requiring that all materials "will be the property of the State of Alaska and in the public domain."

Provided @DanaPenner agrees, I propose striking the following phrase, as it seems redundant:

Deliver a final report that shall include list of sprint tasks completed, documentation, and link to code repository.

[DanaPenner]

@mheadd agreed we can strike the following: Deliver a final report that shall include list of sprint tasks completed, documentation, and link to code repository.