Skip to main content

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
Re: [soa-pmc] It's time to terminate STP

Am 17.01.2012 um 16:02 schrieb Mos, Adrian:

Hi guys,
I think the solution of moving the required stp.model plugins to ebpm’s repository is a good one. Even if other people use them, they would ideally migrate to Mangrove’s project code base, which is just an evolution of the older stp.model component.
Engineering will hopefully also migrate soon to Mangrove in the ebpm and spagic future versions.
Regarding the termination review I think your suggestion is good Wayne, to simply add stp.model to the overall STP termination review process.
Regarding Policy, I am not sure if it’s used, I would expect former SOPERA members (Zsolt?) to know more about this…

Just made a short survey within Talend / Sopera and consensus was to terminate the Policy project. Though I never have been  involved in the policy project nor in STP and I think I am not the right person to initiate the necessary termination review. Anyone else volunteering?


Best regards,
From: soa-pmc-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:soa-pmc-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Andrea Zoppello
Sent: jeudi 12 janvier 2012 16:09
To: soa-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [soa-pmc] It's time to terminate STP

My comments inline:

Il 12/01/2012 15:46, Wayne Beaton ha scritto:

FWIW, "Top Level Project" has a specific meaning in the EDP.  Your list looks like a bunch of bundles from stp.model (Intermediate Model). Is this correct?

Yes we definitely don't need all the stp.model stuff, but only the bundles that ebpm require.

The EDP requires that we engage in a Restructuring review. It's a relatively simple affair, requiring only a short description of what needs to move and where. We can include it in the STP termination documentation. i.e. we can combine the STP termination review with a stp.model move review. Once we have all the answers, I'll finish up the termination/move documentation and schedule the review.

Ok for me, but as i said above we're going to move and mantain in ebpm repositories only the bundles of intermediate model required by ebpm ( for example ebpm does not need the sca stuff... ).

Does moving to stp.model to eBPM make general sense? Does it fall under the scope of eBPM? Does anybody else depend on this code?

The ( ideal )right way to go ( for eBPM too.. ) would be a transition to Mangrove project, 
but we need to mantain that code for two reason: 

1) A migration is not always possible ( production  projects using that code probably will not be migrated )
2) Actually in eBPM project we've planned a migration, but we have don't made yet...

What of stp.policy?

Don't know nothing about this. 


Andrea Zoppello 
Spagic Architect

Corso Stati Uniti, 23/C - 35127 Padova - Italy
Tel. +39-049.8283411
Mob. +39-345.4668537
Engineering Group
IT Solution Architect
Research & Innovation Division
Architectures & Consulting
  Respect the environment. Please don't print this e-mail unless you really need to.

The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you received this in error, please contact the sender and delete the material from any computer.

soa-pmc mailing list

Back to the top