“Oslo” and DSI/Dynamic IT
I was just reading William Vambenepe’s So long Oslo post and thought I would comment here.
While we are aligning “Oslo” more closely with our data platform assets as I discussed in my On Oslo post, that does not mean that this work is any less important for DSI/Dynamic IT scenarios.
We spent a great deal of time with the System Center team before this move. Since the move, we have spent more – a lot more.
Part of that is some things coming out of incubation in the management space that I am not going to talk about.
Another part is that having a modeling language, a set of common models and a repository as part of the underlying data platform makes it easier to get some of this work done.
Net: the “Oslo” technologies have and will continue to play an important role in enabling DSI/Dynamic IT scenarios.
[...] 2009/8/28: Doug responded with enough of a teaser (”some things coming out of incubation in the management space”) to give me [...]
William Vambenepe’s blog » Blog Archive » So long Oslo
28 Aug 09 at 18:25
Thanks for the response Doug. You give me enough of a teaser that I’ll stick around. At least I’ll keep reading your blog, waiting for more info on this DSI link.
WRT to your other point, that “having a modeling language, a set of common models and a repository as part of the underlying data platform makes it easier to get some of this work done” I very much agree in principle as explained at http://stage.vambenepe.com/archives/125 (ironically in the context of Microsoft, but talking about SCA/SML as this was pre-Oslo.
But while I agree in principle, I am not too sure about the practicality in the case of M based on the ADO.NET-type use cases that it seems to go after. It’s not just a model that you need, it’s a model at a high enough level of granularity that it is usable for management tasks. If you give me something that is as granular as the list of tables and classes used by my app it doesn’t help me much (though it is indeed a “model”). SCA is attractive because of the level of granularity (e.g. a BPEL process) at which it gets used. M could be used to create models at that level, but I haven’t seen much of that so far (though my vision of M usage is of course very limited). Do you?
William Vambenepe
28 Aug 09 at 18:35
Great, you’ve got a solution out looking for a problem. Pardon me if we don’t wait for whatever you can’t talk about — anyone for another try at WhiteHorse?
BeenThere
31 Aug 09 at 17:13