On 09.12.10 15:45, "Stéphane Urbanovski" <s.urbanov...@ac-nancy-metz.fr> wrote:
>Christian Skarby a écrit : >> Congratulations on the release! >> >>> *criticity : in fact when I talk about result_modulation about >>> CRITICAL->WARNING for qualification env, it was a first step to the >>> "criticity" dimension. It take some time to make the turn of my head, >>>but >>> now it's clear : we need another "dimension" than just >>> OK/WARNING/CRITICAL. >>> It's not enough. We do not need to add another 0,1,2 states. The >>>"service" >>> can eb critical, but it's "criticity" is not so important >>>(qualification >>> env, or slow prod one). When a Warning on a TOP criticity env will be >>>to >>> solve in priority (look at the boss behind you, he will say to you what >>> solve first ;) ). >>> With it, UIs will have a way to make theses high criticity elements >>>make >>> the >>> front page. Think at priority inbox from Google : same thing. >> >> Perhaps we could call it severity instead of "criticity"? >> http://www.dict.org/bin/Dict?Form=Dict2&Database=*&Query=severity > >For me, "severity" is for the OK/WARNING/CRITICAL state. > >"Criticity" reflect the global impact of the service. Some tools also use >"priority". But I guess that should be "criticality" Julian ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ Shinken-devel mailing list Shinken-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/shinken-devel
