Re: [cosmos-dev] Oliver Action Item - Elevator Pitch

[Craig Thomas <cthomas@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi Oliver,

Oliver E Cole wrote:
> Are there specific items that you look to adopt?  Or just "GroundWork 
> is in the business of  open source monitoring, so would use any and 
> all good stuff that comes out of COSMOS and June is the first time 
> that you could expect something"?
We at GroundWork would consider adopting any and all good stuff that 
comes out of COSMOS. The well-delineated interfaces of the components 
seem to lead to the kind of incremental adoption that we would find most 
compelling.

The Data Collection mechanisms look to be shaping up as strongly 
adoptable, and will have the extensibility that would allow us to employ 
them.
>  You mention "model elements" as a reason why the June release will be 
> "deficient".  Is the solidification of "model" elements a post June 
> goal?   (Bonus points if you can define what a model element is...).
I would have chosen the word "insufficient" rather than "deficient" as 
an adjective for the June release, and only as regards the "grayed out" 
parts of the architecture.

The "model elements" are the common model library definitions that are 
essential to multi-vendor interoperability.  Absent use of a common set 
of model elements, SML's utility as a language for interoperable 
solutions will be limited. (I'm sure I will have to forfeit any bonus 
points here because of the juxtaposition of the sixth through eighth 
words of this paragraph!)

Thanks,
   Craig.