Notice: this Wiki will be going read only early in 2024 and edits will no longer be possible. Please see: https://gitlab.eclipse.org/eclipsefdn/helpdesk/-/wikis/Wiki-shutdown-plan for the plan.
Cosmos Architecture Meeting 16-Jan-08
Revision as of 11:39, 16 January 2008 by Tmakins.us.ibm.com (Talk | contribs) (New page: == Attendees == * Jimmy * David * Ali * Jack Devine * Martin * Paul * Valentina * JT * Leonard * Tania * Don * Hubert * Joel == Review of i9 ERs == * '''209980''' - no issues * '''20582...)
Attendees
- Jimmy
- David
- Ali
- Jack Devine
- Martin
- Paul
- Valentina
- JT
- Leonard
- Tania
- Don
- Hubert
- Joel
Review of i9 ERs
- 209980 - no issues
- 205825 - design is on the wiki and the sizing is attached to the design
- 205863 - Jimmy: How does this relate to the security scoping ER we are delivering in i8 (209337)? Joel/Don: This is related but different. It is related to the Muse work that Joel and Balan are working on. Once Joel proceeds with the design we can determine the overlaps.
- 215123 - There are 2 parts to this: Support for policy (Joel) , Changing data managers to support that interface (Bill). We do not need to break this into 2 ERs. Joel has some of the code done. He will check it in once we open up for i9.
- 205826 - This ER dependent on updating to the next version of SML
- 205956 - Valentina proposed that this be moved out of i9 because we need a consumer requirement to define the APIs. Team agreed.
- 208100 - not sure if this should be in the scope of i9 since 215267 has a higher priority. Ali wants to confirm with deployers and Mark. Do we need an ER that specifies an reconciliation taxonomy scheme before we start running queries against it? This is the next rev of the data center model that we base the work that we do on. We should not use the "reconciliation taxonomy".
- 208274 - This should be an i10 deliverable because there are too many pre-requisites. Mark will open the pre-requisite ERs on this
- 208604 - We can talk through this with the Aperi team
- 212293 - What is in scope for the notification broker - We may be able to push this one out since we don't have anyone asking for this. How is this different from an event broker? The notification broker would do WS-Notification and supports topics. We should mark this as "future".
- 209987 - no issues
- 212297 - Dependent on the notification broker enhancement (212293). We should also move this to future.
- 214672 - We should implement this in i9. This should be added to the use case page to the registering MDR use cases.