Jump to: navigation, search

Cosmos Architecture Meeting 06-Feb-08

Revision as of 11:18, 13 February 2008 by David whiteman.us.ibm.com (Talk | contribs)

(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

Attendees

  • Mark Weitzel
  • David Whiteman

Minutes

Integration Build

  • i9 build changed to run on Tomcat. Still a few problems with the annotation code that Joel is working on. Target is next Tuesday for the integration build. We are targeting Friday for this to be complete.
  • Srinivas is not able to download the integration build. He will open a P1 bug and get Jagmit to fix this.
  • There were three issues with the linux builds, however we should be able to smoke test this build to verify. However, b/c of a few bugs, we may want to try last week's build.
    • Log files sizes
    • Configuration
    • "/" vs. "\"
  • This build is less stable than last week's build.
    • Registration of MDRs to brokers will not work b/c of annotation bug that Joel is targeted to fix by Friday.
  • New features in this week's build include Metadata.
  • Joel will open a bug on IPv6 and how Muse handles the host name resolution. Target is a plan of action by Friday.


QA Discussion

  • Everyone must read over this process. We will close on Friday: Speak then or forever hold your peace.


CMDBf Registration APIs

How to keep the integrity of the data b/t the federating CMDB and the MDR?


Command line or web UI to manage COSMOS components?

  • For i9, we are going to keep what we have and only fix things that are broken.
  • We will need to refactor the code to formalize the admin service. This will be done in i10.
  • On Friday, we will review the use cases and identify those that have admin like function and associate the ER.
    • Jimmy will take the lead on focusing the discussion for Friday

Target environment for data managers in the demo

Deployment topology for i9 demo

  • Domain and broker already run on tomcat in j2ee
  • The MDR will be deployed in Tomcat


  • How do we support OSGi? This might be a 1.0 discussion, but we don't want OSGi to be a "second class citizen".
    • This impacts David's tooling, deployment, et.
    • This does NOT mean that we are not supporting OSGi as a server platform.
      • We'll need to make sure our test matrix reflects

Eclipse version: 3.3.x vs. 3.4

  • We should upgrade to 3.4
  • We are targeting the next integration build on Feb 12 as the time to switch.
    • If we can't do this next week, then the target is 25 March.