Hi Steve, Thanks for your feedback. We kept the word "tool" as seems to apply in many contexts. Even in the case of a "performance monitoring solution" wouldn't that consist of multiple "tools" that interact and interconnect? At worst, the users that "solution" would understand "tool". Your other feedback we have incorporated in various ways, sometimes in the statements, and sometimes as mock quotes.
EVERYONE: please take a look at the latest statements, examples, and (mock) quotes provided and let us know what you think: http://open-services.net/wiki/communications/Why-should-you-care-about-OSLC/ Happy New Year! Sean Kennedy OSLC: Lifecycle integration inspired by the web -- http://open-services.net/ Eclipse Lyo: Enabling tool integration with OSLC -- http://eclipse.org/lyo/ There is nothing more powerful than an idea whose time has come. -- Victor Hugo From: Steve K Speicher <[email protected]> To: [email protected], Date: 12/12/20 02:10 PM Subject: Re: [Oslc-communications] Why should you care about OSLC Sent by: "Oslc-Communications" <[email protected]> Good work, here is some of my feedback... The focus on "Tool" feels fairly ALM focused (though see it applies to PLM). I think that OSLC domains span various domains that the term "Tool" may not resonate. Perhaps it would be best to say "Product" instead? For example, for typical ISM and DevOps environments....would this accurately reflect them? For DevOps perhaps. When I want to deploy a performance monitoring solution, would this be a "tool"? Tool Vendor: Perhaps it would be good to add: - be able to focus on core competencies and augment/compliment with solutions that connect via open standards-based interfaces Tool User: Without loosely coupled integrations end users are forced to stay on back-levels of products to ensure API mismatches don't break brittle integrations, they therefore can't get the value out of new release features and improvements until much later. (I have seen this many times, end users are stuck on very old releases and gives the products a bad image even though most of the issues have been resolved in newer releases) Thanks, Steve Speicher IBM Rational Software OSLC - Lifecycle integration inspired by the web -> http://open-services.net "Oslc-Communications" <[email protected]> wrote on 12/20/2012 10:20:56 AM: > From: Sean Kennedy <[email protected]> > To: [email protected], > Date: 12/20/2012 10:21 AM > Subject: [Oslc-communications] Why should you care about OSLC > Sent by: "Oslc-Communications" <[email protected]> > > Hello everyone, > > As per the action item #2 [1] from our last meeting, Allan, Andy and myself > have met to work on some common value statements for OSLC and the various personas. > > It would be great to get your feedback on our work to this point. Please > take the opportunity to review what we've created [2], and comment by > replying to this mail. > > Also, please provide your availability for the week of January 21 so we can > find a good time for our next meeting. (Use this [3] doodle poll.) > > I hope you all get to relax over the holidays, and look forward to working > with you in 2013. > > [1]: http://open-services.net/wiki/communications/1211-meeting/#Action-Items > [2]: http://open-services.net/wiki/communications/Why-should-you-care-about-OSLC/ > [3]: http://doodle.com/ifw7uheetptw9u9g > Sean Kennedy > > [image removed] > > [image removed] > > OSLC: Lifecycle integration inspired by the web -- http://open-services.net/ > Eclipse Lyo: Enabling tool integration with OSLC -- http://eclipse.org/lyo/ > There is nothing more powerful than an idea whose time has come. -- Victor Hugo > _______________________________________________ > Oslc-Communications mailing list > [email protected] > http://open-services.net/mailman/listinfo/oslc-communications_open-services.net _______________________________________________ Oslc-Communications mailing list [email protected] http://open-services.net/mailman/listinfo/oslc-communications_open-services.net
