Home » Archived » COSMOS » actors for monitor use cases
| |
| Re: actors for monitor use cases [message #1243 is a reply to message #1191] |
Fri, 20 October 2006 00:37   |
 Craig Thomas
Messages: 14
Registered: July 2009 |
Junior Member |
|
|
Thanks much for the quick feedback.
Let's include the Software Developer among the actors on the a-list, and
move the Telecomm Admin into the omitted set.
I'll put the information onto the wiki overnight tonight, with these
modifications, so we can make these changes visible quickly.
Thanks,
--Craig.
Mark W. wrote:
> In the pdf, there is this:
>
> "Omitted from the set of actors at this stage are a few that would be
> served by an Eclipse Cosmos
> monitoring application with a broader scope:
> ? Software Developer – User who develops software components for
> deployment in the monitored environment."
>
> The Software Developer role is key for the Build to Manage aspect of
> this. It makes sense to have leave out the Security Admin and the
> Financial Analyst. Should Telcom admin might fall on the omitted list
> as well?
>
>
>
>
> Craig Thomas wrote:
>> Toward the effort of identifying the high-priority use cases for
>> Eclipse Cosmos, here is starting place for a description of the
>> actors. Please feel free to modify to suit, discuss, or just toss it
>> and provide a better set.
>>
>> (The material is in an attached tar.gz which contains a document in
>> OpenOffice format along with a PDF version of the same information. I
>> guess we'll have to learn what formats work for the whole team over
>> time. If anyone has difficulty obtaining or reviewing the material,
>> please let me know.)
>>
>> Thanks,
>> --Craig Thomas
>> cthomas@groundworkopensource.com
>>
>> P.S.: It was great meeting all of you on today's Cosmos Community
>> Kickoff. I'm looking forward to working with you.
|
|
|
| Re: actors for monitor use cases [message #1268 is a reply to message #1129] |
Fri, 20 October 2006 01:02 |
Craig Thomas
Messages: 14
Registered: July 2009 |
Junior Member |
|
|
Please look for the latest version, as well as for subsequent revisions,
on the wiki, at http://wiki.eclipse.org/index.php/COSMOS
Thanks,
--Craig.
Craig Thomas wrote:
> Toward the effort of identifying the high-priority use cases for Eclipse
> Cosmos, here is starting place for a description of the actors. Please
> feel free to modify to suit, discuss, or just toss it and provide a
> better set.
>
> (The material is in an attached tar.gz which contains a document in
> OpenOffice format along with a PDF version of the same information. I
> guess we'll have to learn what formats work for the whole team over
> time. If anyone has difficulty obtaining or reviewing the material,
> please let me know.)
>
> Thanks,
> --Craig Thomas
> cthomas@groundworkopensource.com
>
> P.S.: It was great meeting all of you on today's Cosmos Community
> Kickoff. I'm looking forward to working with you.
|
|
| |
| Actors: Anylyst and Architect [message #1331 is a reply to message #1268] |
Tue, 24 October 2006 01:28 |
Mark Weitzel
Messages: 78
Registered: July 2009 |
Member |
|
|
Here's a link to the current actor diagram:
http://wiki.eclipse.org/index.php/Use_case_actors
Looking over this again in prep for the meeting tomorrow I was thinking
that we should take a position on Analyst and Architect given these are
fairly common.
Analyst
This is the actor that deals with/defines the large building blocks of
application architecture. The tools we are creating in COSMOS do not
really apply at this level. Therefore, Analyst should be on the exclude
list.
Architect
There are two potential use cases where the Architect *may* play a role.
The first is in defining a new resource model. In the SML tooling
space, it's possible that the Architect would define what a new resource
model would look like. Similarly, the Architect may define the
management instrumentation, e.g. by "mapping" a WSDM interface onto the
resource type, or by indicating where to instrument for JMX. The
Developer would then be able to use this information to actually
build/test/debug the resource instrumentation. Therefore, the Architect
should be included.
Thoughts....
-mw
Craig Thomas wrote:
> Please look for the latest version, as well as for subsequent revisions,
> on the wiki, at http://wiki.eclipse.org/index.php/COSMOS
>
> Thanks,
> --Craig.
>
> Craig Thomas wrote:
>> Toward the effort of identifying the high-priority use cases for
>> Eclipse Cosmos, here is starting place for a description of the
>> actors. Please feel free to modify to suit, discuss, or just toss it
>> and provide a better set.
>>
>> (The material is in an attached tar.gz which contains a document in
>> OpenOffice format along with a PDF version of the same information. I
>> guess we'll have to learn what formats work for the whole team over
>> time. If anyone has difficulty obtaining or reviewing the material,
>> please let me know.)
>>
>> Thanks,
>> --Craig Thomas
>> cthomas@groundworkopensource.com
>>
>> P.S.: It was great meeting all of you on today's Cosmos Community
>> Kickoff. I'm looking forward to working with you.
|
|
|
| Clarification: Sys. Admin vs. Monitor Admin vs. Network Admin [message #1850 is a reply to message #1268] |
Tue, 24 October 2006 01:42 |
Mark Weitzel
Messages: 78
Registered: July 2009 |
Member |
|
|
Here are the definitions of the actors we have on the wiki
(http://wiki.eclipse.org/index.php/Use_case_actors):
# The Monitor Admin is a User who is responsible for the operation and
configuration of the monitoring application.
# The Sys Admin is an Admin who is responsible for the condition of
systems and applications.
# The Network Admin is an Admin who is responsible for the condition of
the network infrastructure.
I'd like to make sure I understand the role of the Monitor Admin. In
our use cases, this is the person that makes sure COSMOS is up and
running correctly. This is their primary use case, correct?
If so, it seems this would lead us to specify how we will instrument
COSMOS to be "manageable" by, COSMOS. The "eat your own dog food" (aka
Alpo)use case.
Some things the Monitor Admin would not do...
They do not deploy COSMOS.
They do not deploy newly instrumented resources (applications, hardware,
etc..)
They do not monitor resources (other than the management applications
themselves)
Is this accurate?
-mw
Craig Thomas wrote:
> Please look for the latest version, as well as for subsequent revisions,
> on the wiki, at http://wiki.eclipse.org/index.php/COSMOS
>
> Thanks,
> --Craig.
>
> Craig Thomas wrote:
>> Toward the effort of identifying the high-priority use cases for
>> Eclipse Cosmos, here is starting place for a description of the
>> actors. Please feel free to modify to suit, discuss, or just toss it
>> and provide a better set.
>>
>> (The material is in an attached tar.gz which contains a document in
>> OpenOffice format along with a PDF version of the same information. I
>> guess we'll have to learn what formats work for the whole team over
>> time. If anyone has difficulty obtaining or reviewing the material,
>> please let me know.)
>>
>> Thanks,
>> --Craig Thomas
>> cthomas@groundworkopensource.com
>>
>> P.S.: It was great meeting all of you on today's Cosmos Community
>> Kickoff. I'm looking forward to working with you.
|
|
|
| Re: Clarification: Sys. Admin vs. Monitor Admin vs. Network Admin [message #1915 is a reply to message #1850] |
Tue, 24 October 2006 22:56 |
Craig Thomas
Messages: 14
Registered: July 2009 |
Junior Member |
|
|
Thanks for the thoughts on these "admin" roles. (I picked the term admin
because it is used in the IT Management domain.)
The Admin is an "IT Person", the kind of do-everything person that can
take a computer out of the shipping container, put in in the computer
room, turn it on, install an operating system, add a few applications,
get it functioning on the network, and keep it in tip-top shape for its
useful life. In smaller companies, that's pretty much all you have in IT.
In larger companies, the infrastructure is more complicated, and roles
start to specialize. Generally, the first two specializations to emerge
are "Sys Admin" and "Network Admin". The Sys Admin is generally
responsible for -- well -- systems. These are the computers and
applications. The Network Admin is responsible for the networking
equipment that connects systems to each other and to the outside world.
In still larger (or more sophisticated) companies, these admin roles
specialize further, and roles like "Database Administrator" and
"Security Administrator" emerge as well.
So the intent of the Admin Use Case Actors for COSMOS is as follows:
* The Monitor Admin is an Admin who is responsible for the installation,
configuration, and operation of COSMOS. This person is an Admin with
additional skills specific to COSMOS.
* The Sys Admin is an Admin who is responsible for the condition of
systems and applications. The Sys Admin's view of the resources that
COSMOS is monitoring is configured by the Monitor Admin.
* The Network Admin is an Admin who is responsible for the condition of
the network infrastructure. The Network Admin's view of the resources
that COSMOS is monitoring is configured by the Monitor Admin.
(I hope this captures the essence of your input and our conversation on
the phone today. If things need more clarification, or if I missed the
mark, please set me straight again. Thanks.)
I put this text onto the wiki, at
http://wiki.eclipse.org/index.php/Use_case_actors
Thanks,
--Craig.
P.S.:
I like the Alpo analogy -- using COSMOS to manage COSMOS would be a
compelling demonstration of its application. "Adaptive Lifcycle for
Production Operations - Alpo".
Mark W. wrote:
>
> Here are the definitions of the actors we have on the wiki
> (http://wiki.eclipse.org/index.php/Use_case_actors):
> # The Monitor Admin is a User who is responsible for the operation and
> configuration of the monitoring application.
> # The Sys Admin is an Admin who is responsible for the condition of
> systems and applications.
> # The Network Admin is an Admin who is responsible for the condition of
> the network infrastructure.
>
> I'd like to make sure I understand the role of the Monitor Admin. In
> our use cases, this is the person that makes sure COSMOS is up and
> running correctly. This is their primary use case, correct?
>
> If so, it seems this would lead us to specify how we will instrument
> COSMOS to be "manageable" by, COSMOS. The "eat your own dog food" (aka
> Alpo)use case.
>
> Some things the Monitor Admin would not do...
> They do not deploy COSMOS.
> They do not deploy newly instrumented resources (applications, hardware,
> etc..)
> They do not monitor resources (other than the management applications
> themselves)
>
> Is this accurate?
>
> -mw
>
> Craig Thomas wrote:
>> Please look for the latest version, as well as for subsequent
>> revisions, on the wiki, at http://wiki.eclipse.org/index.php/COSMOS
>>
>> Thanks,
>> --Craig.
>>
>> Craig Thomas wrote:
>>> Toward the effort of identifying the high-priority use cases for
>>> Eclipse Cosmos, here is starting place for a description of the
>>> actors. Please feel free to modify to suit, discuss, or just toss it
>>> and provide a better set.
>>>
>>> (The material is in an attached tar.gz which contains a document in
>>> OpenOffice format along with a PDF version of the same information. I
>>> guess we'll have to learn what formats work for the whole team over
>>> time. If anyone has difficulty obtaining or reviewing the material,
>>> please let me know.)
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> --Craig Thomas
>>> cthomas@groundworkopensource.com
>>>
>>> P.S.: It was great meeting all of you on today's Cosmos Community
>>> Kickoff. I'm looking forward to working with you.
|
|
|
| Re: Actors: Anylyst and Architect [message #1929 is a reply to message #1331] |
Tue, 24 October 2006 23:10 |
Craig Thomas
Messages: 14
Registered: July 2009 |
Junior Member |
|
|
Thanks for exploring these two actors.
These have been added to the wiki at
http://wiki.eclipse.org/index.php/Use_case_actors
Please let me know if I lost anything in the translation.
Thanks,
--Craig.
Mark W. wrote:
> Here's a link to the current actor diagram:
> http://wiki.eclipse.org/index.php/Use_case_actors
>
> Looking over this again in prep for the meeting tomorrow I was thinking
> that we should take a position on Analyst and Architect given these are
> fairly common.
>
> Analyst
> This is the actor that deals with/defines the large building blocks of
> application architecture. The tools we are creating in COSMOS do not
> really apply at this level. Therefore, Analyst should be on the exclude
> list.
>
> Architect
> There are two potential use cases where the Architect *may* play a role.
> The first is in defining a new resource model. In the SML tooling
> space, it's possible that the Architect would define what a new resource
> model would look like. Similarly, the Architect may define the
> management instrumentation, e.g. by "mapping" a WSDM interface onto the
> resource type, or by indicating where to instrument for JMX. The
> Developer would then be able to use this information to actually
> build/test/debug the resource instrumentation. Therefore, the Architect
> should be included.
>
> Thoughts....
>
> -mw
>
> Craig Thomas wrote:
>> Please look for the latest version, as well as for subsequent
>> revisions, on the wiki, at http://wiki.eclipse.org/index.php/COSMOS
>>
>> Thanks,
>> --Craig.
>>
>> Craig Thomas wrote:
>>> Toward the effort of identifying the high-priority use cases for
>>> Eclipse Cosmos, here is starting place for a description of the
>>> actors. Please feel free to modify to suit, discuss, or just toss it
>>> and provide a better set.
>>>
>>> (The material is in an attached tar.gz which contains a document in
>>> OpenOffice format along with a PDF version of the same information. I
>>> guess we'll have to learn what formats work for the whole team over
>>> time. If anyone has difficulty obtaining or reviewing the material,
>>> please let me know.)
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> --Craig Thomas
>>> cthomas@groundworkopensource.com
>>>
>>> P.S.: It was great meeting all of you on today's Cosmos Community
>>> Kickoff. I'm looking forward to working with you.
|
|
|
| Re: Clarification: Sys. Admin vs. Monitor Admin vs. Network Admin [message #1941 is a reply to message #1915] |
Wed, 25 October 2006 14:28 |
Mark Weitzel
Messages: 78
Registered: July 2009 |
Member |
|
|
Craig,
Yes. This helps clarify for me these roles. Thanks!
-mw
Craig Thomas wrote:
> Thanks for the thoughts on these "admin" roles. (I picked the term admin
> because it is used in the IT Management domain.)
>
> The Admin is an "IT Person", the kind of do-everything person that can
> take a computer out of the shipping container, put in in the computer
> room, turn it on, install an operating system, add a few applications,
> get it functioning on the network, and keep it in tip-top shape for its
> useful life. In smaller companies, that's pretty much all you have in IT.
>
> In larger companies, the infrastructure is more complicated, and roles
> start to specialize. Generally, the first two specializations to emerge
> are "Sys Admin" and "Network Admin". The Sys Admin is generally
> responsible for -- well -- systems. These are the computers and
> applications. The Network Admin is responsible for the networking
> equipment that connects systems to each other and to the outside world.
> In still larger (or more sophisticated) companies, these admin roles
> specialize further, and roles like "Database Administrator" and
> "Security Administrator" emerge as well.
>
> So the intent of the Admin Use Case Actors for COSMOS is as follows:
> * The Monitor Admin is an Admin who is responsible for the installation,
> configuration, and operation of COSMOS. This person is an Admin with
> additional skills specific to COSMOS.
> * The Sys Admin is an Admin who is responsible for the condition of
> systems and applications. The Sys Admin's view of the resources that
> COSMOS is monitoring is configured by the Monitor Admin.
> * The Network Admin is an Admin who is responsible for the condition of
> the network infrastructure. The Network Admin's view of the resources
> that COSMOS is monitoring is configured by the Monitor Admin.
>
> (I hope this captures the essence of your input and our conversation on
> the phone today. If things need more clarification, or if I missed the
> mark, please set me straight again. Thanks.)
>
> I put this text onto the wiki, at
> http://wiki.eclipse.org/index.php/Use_case_actors
>
> Thanks,
> --Craig.
>
> P.S.:
> I like the Alpo analogy -- using COSMOS to manage COSMOS would be a
> compelling demonstration of its application. "Adaptive Lifcycle for
> Production Operations - Alpo".
>
>
>
> Mark W. wrote:
>>
>> Here are the definitions of the actors we have on the wiki
>> (http://wiki.eclipse.org/index.php/Use_case_actors):
>> # The Monitor Admin is a User who is responsible for the operation
>> and configuration of the monitoring application.
>> # The Sys Admin is an Admin who is responsible for the condition of
>> systems and applications.
>> # The Network Admin is an Admin who is responsible for the condition
>> of the network infrastructure.
>>
>> I'd like to make sure I understand the role of the Monitor Admin. In
>> our use cases, this is the person that makes sure COSMOS is up and
>> running correctly. This is their primary use case, correct?
>>
>> If so, it seems this would lead us to specify how we will instrument
>> COSMOS to be "manageable" by, COSMOS. The "eat your own dog food"
>> (aka Alpo)use case.
>>
>> Some things the Monitor Admin would not do...
>> They do not deploy COSMOS.
>> They do not deploy newly instrumented resources (applications,
>> hardware, etc..)
>> They do not monitor resources (other than the management applications
>> themselves)
>>
>> Is this accurate?
>>
>> -mw
>>
>> Craig Thomas wrote:
>>> Please look for the latest version, as well as for subsequent
>>> revisions, on the wiki, at http://wiki.eclipse.org/index.php/COSMOS
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> --Craig.
>>>
>>> Craig Thomas wrote:
>>>> Toward the effort of identifying the high-priority use cases for
>>>> Eclipse Cosmos, here is starting place for a description of the
>>>> actors. Please feel free to modify to suit, discuss, or just toss it
>>>> and provide a better set.
>>>>
>>>> (The material is in an attached tar.gz which contains a document in
>>>> OpenOffice format along with a PDF version of the same information.
>>>> I guess we'll have to learn what formats work for the whole team
>>>> over time. If anyone has difficulty obtaining or reviewing the
>>>> material, please let me know.)
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> --Craig Thomas
>>>> cthomas@groundworkopensource.com
>>>>
>>>> P.S.: It was great meeting all of you on today's Cosmos Community
>>>> Kickoff. I'm looking forward to working with you.
|
|
| |
| Re: actors for monitor use cases [message #566869 is a reply to message #1191] |
Fri, 20 October 2006 00:37 |
Craig Thomas
Messages: 14
Registered: July 2009 |
Junior Member |
|
|
Thanks much for the quick feedback.
Let's include the Software Developer among the actors on the a-list, and
move the Telecomm Admin into the omitted set.
I'll put the information onto the wiki overnight tonight, with these
modifications, so we can make these changes visible quickly.
Thanks,
--Craig.
Mark W. wrote:
> In the pdf, there is this:
>
> "Omitted from the set of actors at this stage are a few that would be
> served by an Eclipse Cosmos
> monitoring application with a broader scope:
> ? Software Developer – User who develops software components for
> deployment in the monitored environment."
>
> The Software Developer role is key for the Build to Manage aspect of
> this. It makes sense to have leave out the Security Admin and the
> Financial Analyst. Should Telcom admin might fall on the omitted list
> as well?
>
>
>
>
> Craig Thomas wrote:
>> Toward the effort of identifying the high-priority use cases for
>> Eclipse Cosmos, here is starting place for a description of the
>> actors. Please feel free to modify to suit, discuss, or just toss it
>> and provide a better set.
>>
>> (The material is in an attached tar.gz which contains a document in
>> OpenOffice format along with a PDF version of the same information. I
>> guess we'll have to learn what formats work for the whole team over
>> time. If anyone has difficulty obtaining or reviewing the material,
>> please let me know.)
>>
>> Thanks,
>> --Craig Thomas
>> cthomas@groundworkopensource.com
>>
>> P.S.: It was great meeting all of you on today's Cosmos Community
>> Kickoff. I'm looking forward to working with you.
|
|
|
| Re: actors for monitor use cases [message #566878 is a reply to message #1129] |
Fri, 20 October 2006 01:02 |
Craig Thomas
Messages: 14
Registered: July 2009 |
Junior Member |
|
|
Please look for the latest version, as well as for subsequent revisions,
on the wiki, at http://wiki.eclipse.org/index.php/COSMOS
Thanks,
--Craig.
Craig Thomas wrote:
> Toward the effort of identifying the high-priority use cases for Eclipse
> Cosmos, here is starting place for a description of the actors. Please
> feel free to modify to suit, discuss, or just toss it and provide a
> better set.
>
> (The material is in an attached tar.gz which contains a document in
> OpenOffice format along with a PDF version of the same information. I
> guess we'll have to learn what formats work for the whole team over
> time. If anyone has difficulty obtaining or reviewing the material,
> please let me know.)
>
> Thanks,
> --Craig Thomas
> cthomas@groundworkopensource.com
>
> P.S.: It was great meeting all of you on today's Cosmos Community
> Kickoff. I'm looking forward to working with you.
|
|
| |
| Actors: Anylyst and Architect [message #566955 is a reply to message #1268] |
Tue, 24 October 2006 01:28 |
Mark Weitzel
Messages: 78
Registered: July 2009 |
Member |
|
|
Here's a link to the current actor diagram:
http://wiki.eclipse.org/index.php/Use_case_actors
Looking over this again in prep for the meeting tomorrow I was thinking
that we should take a position on Analyst and Architect given these are
fairly common.
Analyst
This is the actor that deals with/defines the large building blocks of
application architecture. The tools we are creating in COSMOS do not
really apply at this level. Therefore, Analyst should be on the exclude
list.
Architect
There are two potential use cases where the Architect *may* play a role.
The first is in defining a new resource model. In the SML tooling
space, it's possible that the Architect would define what a new resource
model would look like. Similarly, the Architect may define the
management instrumentation, e.g. by "mapping" a WSDM interface onto the
resource type, or by indicating where to instrument for JMX. The
Developer would then be able to use this information to actually
build/test/debug the resource instrumentation. Therefore, the Architect
should be included.
Thoughts....
-mw
Craig Thomas wrote:
> Please look for the latest version, as well as for subsequent revisions,
> on the wiki, at http://wiki.eclipse.org/index.php/COSMOS
>
> Thanks,
> --Craig.
>
> Craig Thomas wrote:
>> Toward the effort of identifying the high-priority use cases for
>> Eclipse Cosmos, here is starting place for a description of the
>> actors. Please feel free to modify to suit, discuss, or just toss it
>> and provide a better set.
>>
>> (The material is in an attached tar.gz which contains a document in
>> OpenOffice format along with a PDF version of the same information. I
>> guess we'll have to learn what formats work for the whole team over
>> time. If anyone has difficulty obtaining or reviewing the material,
>> please let me know.)
>>
>> Thanks,
>> --Craig Thomas
>> cthomas@groundworkopensource.com
>>
>> P.S.: It was great meeting all of you on today's Cosmos Community
>> Kickoff. I'm looking forward to working with you.
|
|
|
| Clarification: Sys. Admin vs. Monitor Admin vs. Network Admin [message #566988 is a reply to message #1268] |
Tue, 24 October 2006 01:42 |
Mark Weitzel
Messages: 78
Registered: July 2009 |
Member |
|
|
Here are the definitions of the actors we have on the wiki
(http://wiki.eclipse.org/index.php/Use_case_actors):
# The Monitor Admin is a User who is responsible for the operation and
configuration of the monitoring application.
# The Sys Admin is an Admin who is responsible for the condition of
systems and applications.
# The Network Admin is an Admin who is responsible for the condition of
the network infrastructure.
I'd like to make sure I understand the role of the Monitor Admin. In
our use cases, this is the person that makes sure COSMOS is up and
running correctly. This is their primary use case, correct?
If so, it seems this would lead us to specify how we will instrument
COSMOS to be "manageable" by, COSMOS. The "eat your own dog food" (aka
Alpo)use case.
Some things the Monitor Admin would not do...
They do not deploy COSMOS.
They do not deploy newly instrumented resources (applications, hardware,
etc..)
They do not monitor resources (other than the management applications
themselves)
Is this accurate?
-mw
Craig Thomas wrote:
> Please look for the latest version, as well as for subsequent revisions,
> on the wiki, at http://wiki.eclipse.org/index.php/COSMOS
>
> Thanks,
> --Craig.
>
> Craig Thomas wrote:
>> Toward the effort of identifying the high-priority use cases for
>> Eclipse Cosmos, here is starting place for a description of the
>> actors. Please feel free to modify to suit, discuss, or just toss it
>> and provide a better set.
>>
>> (The material is in an attached tar.gz which contains a document in
>> OpenOffice format along with a PDF version of the same information. I
>> guess we'll have to learn what formats work for the whole team over
>> time. If anyone has difficulty obtaining or reviewing the material,
>> please let me know.)
>>
>> Thanks,
>> --Craig Thomas
>> cthomas@groundworkopensource.com
>>
>> P.S.: It was great meeting all of you on today's Cosmos Community
>> Kickoff. I'm looking forward to working with you.
|
|
|
| Re: Clarification: Sys. Admin vs. Monitor Admin vs. Network Admin [message #567075 is a reply to message #1850] |
Tue, 24 October 2006 22:56 |
Craig Thomas
Messages: 14
Registered: July 2009 |
Junior Member |
|
|
Thanks for the thoughts on these "admin" roles. (I picked the term admin
because it is used in the IT Management domain.)
The Admin is an "IT Person", the kind of do-everything person that can
take a computer out of the shipping container, put in in the computer
room, turn it on, install an operating system, add a few applications,
get it functioning on the network, and keep it in tip-top shape for its
useful life. In smaller companies, that's pretty much all you have in IT.
In larger companies, the infrastructure is more complicated, and roles
start to specialize. Generally, the first two specializations to emerge
are "Sys Admin" and "Network Admin". The Sys Admin is generally
responsible for -- well -- systems. These are the computers and
applications. The Network Admin is responsible for the networking
equipment that connects systems to each other and to the outside world.
In still larger (or more sophisticated) companies, these admin roles
specialize further, and roles like "Database Administrator" and
"Security Administrator" emerge as well.
So the intent of the Admin Use Case Actors for COSMOS is as follows:
* The Monitor Admin is an Admin who is responsible for the installation,
configuration, and operation of COSMOS. This person is an Admin with
additional skills specific to COSMOS.
* The Sys Admin is an Admin who is responsible for the condition of
systems and applications. The Sys Admin's view of the resources that
COSMOS is monitoring is configured by the Monitor Admin.
* The Network Admin is an Admin who is responsible for the condition of
the network infrastructure. The Network Admin's view of the resources
that COSMOS is monitoring is configured by the Monitor Admin.
(I hope this captures the essence of your input and our conversation on
the phone today. If things need more clarification, or if I missed the
mark, please set me straight again. Thanks.)
I put this text onto the wiki, at
http://wiki.eclipse.org/index.php/Use_case_actors
Thanks,
--Craig.
P.S.:
I like the Alpo analogy -- using COSMOS to manage COSMOS would be a
compelling demonstration of its application. "Adaptive Lifcycle for
Production Operations - Alpo".
Mark W. wrote:
>
> Here are the definitions of the actors we have on the wiki
> (http://wiki.eclipse.org/index.php/Use_case_actors):
> # The Monitor Admin is a User who is responsible for the operation and
> configuration of the monitoring application.
> # The Sys Admin is an Admin who is responsible for the condition of
> systems and applications.
> # The Network Admin is an Admin who is responsible for the condition of
> the network infrastructure.
>
> I'd like to make sure I understand the role of the Monitor Admin. In
> our use cases, this is the person that makes sure COSMOS is up and
> running correctly. This is their primary use case, correct?
>
> If so, it seems this would lead us to specify how we will instrument
> COSMOS to be "manageable" by, COSMOS. The "eat your own dog food" (aka
> Alpo)use case.
>
> Some things the Monitor Admin would not do...
> They do not deploy COSMOS.
> They do not deploy newly instrumented resources (applications, hardware,
> etc..)
> They do not monitor resources (other than the management applications
> themselves)
>
> Is this accurate?
>
> -mw
>
> Craig Thomas wrote:
>> Please look for the latest version, as well as for subsequent
>> revisions, on the wiki, at http://wiki.eclipse.org/index.php/COSMOS
>>
>> Thanks,
>> --Craig.
>>
>> Craig Thomas wrote:
>>> Toward the effort of identifying the high-priority use cases for
>>> Eclipse Cosmos, here is starting place for a description of the
>>> actors. Please feel free to modify to suit, discuss, or just toss it
>>> and provide a better set.
>>>
>>> (The material is in an attached tar.gz which contains a document in
>>> OpenOffice format along with a PDF version of the same information. I
>>> guess we'll have to learn what formats work for the whole team over
>>> time. If anyone has difficulty obtaining or reviewing the material,
>>> please let me know.)
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> --Craig Thomas
>>> cthomas@groundworkopensource.com
>>>
>>> P.S.: It was great meeting all of you on today's Cosmos Community
>>> Kickoff. I'm looking forward to working with you.
|
|
|
| Re: Actors: Anylyst and Architect [message #567101 is a reply to message #1331] |
Tue, 24 October 2006 23:10 |
Craig Thomas
Messages: 14
Registered: July 2009 |
Junior Member |
|
|
Thanks for exploring these two actors.
These have been added to the wiki at
http://wiki.eclipse.org/index.php/Use_case_actors
Please let me know if I lost anything in the translation.
Thanks,
--Craig.
Mark W. wrote:
> Here's a link to the current actor diagram:
> http://wiki.eclipse.org/index.php/Use_case_actors
>
> Looking over this again in prep for the meeting tomorrow I was thinking
> that we should take a position on Analyst and Architect given these are
> fairly common.
>
> Analyst
> This is the actor that deals with/defines the large building blocks of
> application architecture. The tools we are creating in COSMOS do not
> really apply at this level. Therefore, Analyst should be on the exclude
> list.
>
> Architect
> There are two potential use cases where the Architect *may* play a role.
> The first is in defining a new resource model. In the SML tooling
> space, it's possible that the Architect would define what a new resource
> model would look like. Similarly, the Architect may define the
> management instrumentation, e.g. by "mapping" a WSDM interface onto the
> resource type, or by indicating where to instrument for JMX. The
> Developer would then be able to use this information to actually
> build/test/debug the resource instrumentation. Therefore, the Architect
> should be included.
>
> Thoughts....
>
> -mw
>
> Craig Thomas wrote:
>> Please look for the latest version, as well as for subsequent
>> revisions, on the wiki, at http://wiki.eclipse.org/index.php/COSMOS
>>
>> Thanks,
>> --Craig.
>>
>> Craig Thomas wrote:
>>> Toward the effort of identifying the high-priority use cases for
>>> Eclipse Cosmos, here is starting place for a description of the
>>> actors. Please feel free to modify to suit, discuss, or just toss it
>>> and provide a better set.
>>>
>>> (The material is in an attached tar.gz which contains a document in
>>> OpenOffice format along with a PDF version of the same information. I
>>> guess we'll have to learn what formats work for the whole team over
>>> time. If anyone has difficulty obtaining or reviewing the material,
>>> please let me know.)
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> --Craig Thomas
>>> cthomas@groundworkopensource.com
>>>
>>> P.S.: It was great meeting all of you on today's Cosmos Community
>>> Kickoff. I'm looking forward to working with you.
|
|
|
| Re: Clarification: Sys. Admin vs. Monitor Admin vs. Network Admin [message #567118 is a reply to message #1915] |
Wed, 25 October 2006 14:28 |
Mark Weitzel
Messages: 78
Registered: July 2009 |
Member |
|
|
Craig,
Yes. This helps clarify for me these roles. Thanks!
-mw
Craig Thomas wrote:
> Thanks for the thoughts on these "admin" roles. (I picked the term admin
> because it is used in the IT Management domain.)
>
> The Admin is an "IT Person", the kind of do-everything person that can
> take a computer out of the shipping container, put in in the computer
> room, turn it on, install an operating system, add a few applications,
> get it functioning on the network, and keep it in tip-top shape for its
> useful life. In smaller companies, that's pretty much all you have in IT.
>
> In larger companies, the infrastructure is more complicated, and roles
> start to specialize. Generally, the first two specializations to emerge
> are "Sys Admin" and "Network Admin". The Sys Admin is generally
> responsible for -- well -- systems. These are the computers and
> applications. The Network Admin is responsible for the networking
> equipment that connects systems to each other and to the outside world.
> In still larger (or more sophisticated) companies, these admin roles
> specialize further, and roles like "Database Administrator" and
> "Security Administrator" emerge as well.
>
> So the intent of the Admin Use Case Actors for COSMOS is as follows:
> * The Monitor Admin is an Admin who is responsible for the installation,
> configuration, and operation of COSMOS. This person is an Admin with
> additional skills specific to COSMOS.
> * The Sys Admin is an Admin who is responsible for the condition of
> systems and applications. The Sys Admin's view of the resources that
> COSMOS is monitoring is configured by the Monitor Admin.
> * The Network Admin is an Admin who is responsible for the condition of
> the network infrastructure. The Network Admin's view of the resources
> that COSMOS is monitoring is configured by the Monitor Admin.
>
> (I hope this captures the essence of your input and our conversation on
> the phone today. If things need more clarification, or if I missed the
> mark, please set me straight again. Thanks.)
>
> I put this text onto the wiki, at
> http://wiki.eclipse.org/index.php/Use_case_actors
>
> Thanks,
> --Craig.
>
> P.S.:
> I like the Alpo analogy -- using COSMOS to manage COSMOS would be a
> compelling demonstration of its application. "Adaptive Lifcycle for
> Production Operations - Alpo".
>
>
>
> Mark W. wrote:
>>
>> Here are the definitions of the actors we have on the wiki
>> (http://wiki.eclipse.org/index.php/Use_case_actors):
>> # The Monitor Admin is a User who is responsible for the operation
>> and configuration of the monitoring application.
>> # The Sys Admin is an Admin who is responsible for the condition of
>> systems and applications.
>> # The Network Admin is an Admin who is responsible for the condition
>> of the network infrastructure.
>>
>> I'd like to make sure I understand the role of the Monitor Admin. In
>> our use cases, this is the person that makes sure COSMOS is up and
>> running correctly. This is their primary use case, correct?
>>
>> If so, it seems this would lead us to specify how we will instrument
>> COSMOS to be "manageable" by, COSMOS. The "eat your own dog food"
>> (aka Alpo)use case.
>>
>> Some things the Monitor Admin would not do...
>> They do not deploy COSMOS.
>> They do not deploy newly instrumented resources (applications,
>> hardware, etc..)
>> They do not monitor resources (other than the management applications
>> themselves)
>>
>> Is this accurate?
>>
>> -mw
>>
>> Craig Thomas wrote:
>>> Please look for the latest version, as well as for subsequent
>>> revisions, on the wiki, at http://wiki.eclipse.org/index.php/COSMOS
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> --Craig.
>>>
>>> Craig Thomas wrote:
>>>> Toward the effort of identifying the high-priority use cases for
>>>> Eclipse Cosmos, here is starting place for a description of the
>>>> actors. Please feel free to modify to suit, discuss, or just toss it
>>>> and provide a better set.
>>>>
>>>> (The material is in an attached tar.gz which contains a document in
>>>> OpenOffice format along with a PDF version of the same information.
>>>> I guess we'll have to learn what formats work for the whole team
>>>> over time. If anyone has difficulty obtaining or reviewing the
>>>> material, please let me know.)
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> --Craig Thomas
>>>> cthomas@groundworkopensource.com
>>>>
>>>> P.S.: It was great meeting all of you on today's Cosmos Community
>>>> Kickoff. I'm looking forward to working with you.
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Thu Apr 25 21:46:43 GMT 2024
Powered by FUDForum. Page generated in 0.04295 seconds |
] 
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
