Cosmos Architecture Meeting 17-July-08
These are the minutes for the Architecture Meeting for 17 July 2008.
- JT (lurking)
- Jimmy (not lurking)
- We have basic authentication in place for COSMOS 1.0
- Does anyone have any additional 1.0 requirements?
- COSMOS 2.0: Need to know at least at a very high level what 2.0 may address.
- What should COSMOS 2.0 do in regards to the code COSMOS 1.0 architectural components?
- Are there any thoughts on extending the SML tooling?
- Will COSMOS 2.0 be about providing a reference implementation for some form of an Information Model that may be defined elsewhere?
- Internationalization: Need to establish how the locale is passed to the various components. Mark W. will ask Ruth to verify that we are in compliance with any Eclipse requirements.
- Ruth says read this:
- Ruth also points out that Bjorn said that we can go into the Release review stating that we are not compliant with Eclipse guidelines as long as our consumers are okay with that. (The one exception being Legal requirements. We have to follow the rules for those.) If we are not compliant with Eclipse guidelines, if we can say that all of our consumers are okay with that, then it is not a roadblock for the release review. Thus it is Ruth's opinion that all internationalization* is mandatory for v1.0 but not v0.9.
- David: The amount of i18n for various parts of COSMOS will vary. There are no adequate Eclipse guidelines on the i18n expectations for web UIs.
- i18n - We have already done a lot of what is needed, but will need to review the Eclipse guidelines and try to apply the plug-in specific guidance to our situation, since much of what we do is not delivered as plug-ins. We need to prepare a list of what we plan to do for this, and run it by Bjorn so there are no surprises at release review. Jimmy will help with putting this together. Sheldon: some of the COSMOS UI i18n work has been deferred, pending feedback from CMDBf folks and other arch. decisions.
- Security - Basic security in place for MDRs, in the form of authentication. Everyone on the call (by their silence) agreed that we are satisfied with the level of security support we have already planned for 1.0. Paul (?) will push ER to future for other security additions.
- COSMOS 2.0 - in CA, there is interest in SML and associated tools. We can in implementing an information model to help push a standard forward. David mentioned that to help that go forward, we need to put the resources behind it, and that CA would like to form a 2.0 feature list within the next 60 days or so. We can put this on the agenda for a future summit or the F2F. Jimmy says he would like to see how others besides CA are adopting COSMOS, and gets asked about that a lot.