Re: [Linuxcoe-devel] Scope and Requirements

[Shank, J. R. <js...@hp...>]

On Wed, 2005-07-27 at 10:18 -0700, ed fardos wrote:
> That's absolutely accurate in my opinion jeff; 
> regarding your question about scope between HP-COE
> and opensource-COE, i think it should be similar
> if not identical.

OSLP deliverables are going to be different than the HP LinuxCOE Project
(HPLP) deliverables because HPLP is a service and OSLP is not. That
makes it very difficult to have nearly identical scopes.

> Like Bryang said, LinuxCOE has a standing tradition
> to provide a GPL equivalent wherever we might have
> chosen a proprietary component.

And what exactly does that entail in terms of deliverables? OSLP is not
a service, so I'm not sure what we are providing when you say "a GPL
equivalent...". Do we customize deb/rpm packages for each distribution
and offer those for download?

I'll add a few more comments inline with my original post below, so keep
reading.

> --- "Shank, Jeffrey R." <js...@hp...> wrote:
> 
> > In this thread I'd like to discuss the scope and
> > requirements of the
> > Open Source LinuxCOE Project (OSLP). The HP LinuxCOE
> > system requirements
> > are to provide:
> > 
> >       * Network Installations
> >       * System Profiles

These two items are part of System Designer. As long as SysDes can be
configured to use public mirrors as waystations and a local DBMS for
storing system profiles, these deliverables are easily met in OSLP. The
most important thing to remember is that OSLP is not a service, but
rather the bits so that the user can run the service on their own
machine.

> >       * Patch Distribution Waystations and Tools
> >       * Package Distribution Waystations and Tools

A waystation is just a web/ftp server that offers content mirrored off
of other servers. Anyone can mirror a public distribution, so unless we
have some unique process or scripts that make it easier, this is out of
scope. However, the package/patch management tools that can be
pre-configured by SysDes could be considered in scope as part of the
SysDes deliverable.

> > We are also required to provide:
> > 
> >       * Configuration Tools
> >       * Security Tools
> >       * Event Detection Tools
> >       * Backup Tools

If I understand it correctly, we will provide these tools by means of
selecting existing GPL software and putting a special checkbox on the
SysDes screen under LinuxCOE Bundles. If we didn't offer these things,
users would still be able to select them by simply adding them to
Individual Packages box on Step 4 of SysDes. In other words, our
value-add is that we call them out as system lifecycle management tools.
Do we do more than this? Do we pre-configure them like we do the
package/patch management toolset? If not, this is it just a way to show
off SysDes's "bundle" feature.

Overall, we need to ensure that we do not look at OSLP as a service and
therefore remove service-based deliverables from the scope. We may need
to step back and define OSLP in less grandiose terms. As a service,
LinuxCOE provides provisioning and lifecycle management. As a tool set,
we have to define OSLP in terms of what code we uniquely provide. System
Designer is a huge chunk of that. Is there anything else?