Skip to main content

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.

Jump to: navigation, search

Difference between revisions of "COSMOS Resource Modeling Meeting Minutes"

Line 1: Line 1:
 +
Minuts for [[COSMOS_resource_modeling|Resource Modeling meetings]].
 +
 
=== Dec 5 2006 ===
 
=== Dec 5 2006 ===
  

Revision as of 23:32, 13 May 2008

Minuts for Resource Modeling meetings.

Dec 5 2006

  • There have been several requests for a SML sample. ACTION: S Jerman to ask SML Group when sample is going to be available. [Done - they will investigate]
  • Progress report on Validation, IF inport/export: updates added to Wiki page.
  • Next meeting 5th Jan.

Jan 5 2007

Attendees: Mark, Valentina, Steve Discussion:

  • Progressing on validator. SML workshop may be delayed which will give more time.
  • Need to discuss schedule, interaction with other projects, deliverables at Face2Face. ACTION: Steve to add to agenda.
  • Discussed need for more samples.
  • Next meeting: 19th Jan

26 October 2007

  • Working on documenting interfaces and refining issues related to adopters with different data types
  • Working on putting together a demo of our CMDBf extensions

David whiteman.us.ibm.com 14:41, 26 October 2007 (EDT)


29 April 2008

Attendees: Rich Vasconi (IBM), Mary (SAS), Mark McGraw (SAS), Ali Mehregani (IBM), David Whiteman (IBM)

Discussion:

  • Gave brief overview of RM to Mary and Mark, members of the SDD team who are wanting to ramp up on SML
  • Started to go through open RM bug list in order to identify high priority items for i11
  • Ali and David agreed to split up the investigation and assignment of P1 and P2 defects to determine whether they need a different priority, should be closed, and should be i11 or future.
  • When the topic of bug 213635 came up, we discussed how the documentation for SML and other COSMOS areas would be delivered via Eclipse. David explained that the current intent is to provide the whole User Guide and Developer Guide as integrated with Eclipse help. Ali suggested that much of those documents, particularly in the UG, would not make sense in the Eclipse environment, since the actors wanting that information would not be using Eclipse. Rich mentioned that he has the ability to exclude parts of the doc from the Eclipse based online help. David said that it would be tricky to decide what to include and how to package it, and that we should look at how other Eclipse projects handle this. This might need to be revisited at a community call or summit.
  • We discussed ideas for restructuring our teams on the project. David suggested that if we were not going to be a toplevel project for 1.0, we can now establish the structure of our "workgroups". He mentioned some ideas he had, most notably breaking up the DC team into two, since there is a significant variance in the scope of that subproject. He also mentioned that part of this activity (or all of it) could be in finding people to lead the subteams that are actively involved in the work on those teams.
  • Ali expressed concern that more teams would mean more overhead in the project.

13 May 2008

Attendees: Mary (SAS), Mark McGraw (SAS), Ali Mehregani (IBM), David Whiteman (IBM)

Discussion:

  • No new status to report for RM deliverables, other than what is already on the status wiki page
  • David explained to Mary and Mark the current focus of the RM team, which is 1.1 spec compliance and bug fixing
  • Mark asked about the Tigerstripe integration, and David pointed out that is future work of interest for building SML resources from graphical templates

Back to the top