DevOps in Cloud OSLC Integration


Published on

Presentation given to CSCC on June 27, 2013

Published in: Technology, Business
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Total Views
On Slideshare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • Main Point: We know organizations have a gap between the software delivery capabilities they need to succeed and the ones they have in house currently. Successful organizations know that when they improve their abilities in this area, they increase their success. In fact a recent IBV study where organizations self-reported that... Insights from 435 executives in 58 countries, spanning 18 industries 85% realize and reported it is important to critical Only 25% say they are able to fully leverage software delivery effectively So there is a gap -- but when companies that can close the resulting execution gap stand to benefit. Almost 70 percent of the companies currently leveraging software development for competitive advantage outperform their peers from a profitability standpoint TRANSITION – so there is a huge opportunity for our clients to close that gap…let ’s move to the next slide and talk about how -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Note: Outperformers were determined by a self-assessment of profitability against peers in the industry, ranging from 1 (Significant underperformers) to 5 (Significant outperformers) Significant outperformers were ranked as a 5, Average performers a 3-4 and Underperformers 1-2 new Rational/WebSphere IBV Study "The Software Edge - How effective software development drives competitive advantage" This study examined the correlation between software delivery competency and industry competitive advantage Insights from 435 executives in 58 countries, spanning 18 industries Roles included executives at director level and above in IT and other software organizations Software delivery refers to all areas of development, operations, and support within IT and other development / engineering organizations “ There was 54% of the companies who said they believe software is critical and 32 percent who called it moderately important – so that’s 86 percent of the respondents say software is either critical or moderately important and that points to the need for better tooling for software development and delivery.” said Randy Newell, director of capabilities marketing for IBM Software Group with a focus on the Rational brand.
  • From the Agenda: In this “new normal,” the most forward thinking companies will: Establish an enterprise capability for accelerated delivery of software that enables them to seize market opportunities and reduce time to customer feedback, improve governance while balancing quality and cost
  • Solutions designed only for point-to-point integration No external review or visibility into solution Solutions built to patch immediate need Often integrations were built after the fact with limited product APIs Solution design goals and approach limited No consensus driven approach Integrators limited to a small set of business partners No open process for other interested parties to get involved Limits solution to particular use cases and technologies Restrictive licenses and usage of intellectual property License fees or fear of giving up IP, force alternative solutions
  • Single repository Hard to add existing tools Difficult to evolve tools individually Limited to a single vendor’s tools or affiliates Point-to-point integrations Limited coverage: there are too many tools to cover more than a small fraction of possibilities Tight dependencies between tools require lockstep upgrades Proprietary APIs create vendor lock-in Universal metadata standard Too slow to complete to keep pace with the market Hostage to vendor in-fighting Difficult to migrate existing project data and assets Standard implementations Requires “forklift” rip and replace of existing tools Hard to get widespread vendor support Insufficiently flexible to address different user approaches
  • You do this everyday! Web browser example. + single web page, data sourced from many places … ads, videos, pictures, tweets, comments, content, more links Linking to application lifecycle data where it is created , instead of copying and synchronizing between tools, is the key insight of OSLC. Doing so using standard interfaces , on top of a proven architecture , has helped many realize the value of OSLC already. With OSLC , instead of worrying about integrating specific tools, we focus on composing a set of capabilities. Animations (OSLC is …) : Approach to integrations Philosophy of specification development Set of specifications that tell you what and how to integrate various capabilities It is also the open community where all this happens 4. Read This has benefits to professional users (5), business leaders (6) and creators of integrations (7)
  • *
  • When: - use this to create and maintain links between issues found in production and the fixes made in development to address them - use this to understand the status of problems which require development teams to provide fixes Why: - it is very common for coordinated actions to be taken across development and operations. Linking respective work items increases efficiency of all collaborators - linking information can assist with problem analysis and troubleshooting of similar problems found by operations in the future. How: - background processes (tasks) are run which maintain synchronization of information between TSRM and ClearQuest - extensible to allow for an organization's customized fields to also be updated appropriately
  • Mik: 7 minutes
  • OSLC streamlines and simplifies the creation and management of software, whether the context be traditional IT, smarter infrastructure and devices, mobile, cloud, ... whatever. OSLC's approach to integration solves a decades old problem so that users can mix and match their tools with confidence. This approach is proven and is now to be standardized with support from across the industry, including vendors, enterprise end users, integrators, and academia.
  • W3C LDP + OSLC Core + OSLC Domains
  • Steering Committee At launch, the current OSLC Steering Committee will become the OASIS OSLC Member Section Steering Committee. In 2014, ½ the Steering Committee seats will be up for election by, and from amongst, the organizations who are part of the Member Section. (The other half in 2015; i.e. half the seats are up for election each year.) Technical Committees (TC) This is where the specification development and standardization work happens. Each TC must have participation from 3+ organizations. (There may be multiple participants from each organization.) Participation Organizations who found, or later join, the Member Section gain several privileges: Voting in and standing for election in Steering Committee elections. Working in Technical Committees and Subcommittees. Participate in reviews of TC drafts and submissions (for standardization)
  • Points: At the core is a set of Statements (aka facts), which are typically written down or learned Tell the story as if the present is a tester, they have knowledge of their test cases and of Joe. In the Web 1.0/2.0 way to learn these things is by publishing on a HTML page for a human consumer of it This follows TBL’s 4 rules for linked data First we give these statement URIs so computers can identify them and understand them. Grouping into subject-predicate-object builds the statement Next we can do a HTTP GET to learn more When we learn more, it is in the form of more statements with URIs Those URIs point to more things or relate things back to things we already know (Joe) Jira
  • Points: At the core is a set of Statements (aka facts), which are typically written down or learned Tell the story as if the present is a tester, they have knowledge of their test cases and of Joe. In the Web 1.0/2.0 way to learn these things is by publishing on a HTML page for a human consumer of it This follows TBL’s 4 rules for linked data First we give these statement URIs so computers can identify them and understand them. Grouping into subject-predicate-object builds the statement Next we can do a HTTP GET to learn more When we learn more, it is in the form of more statements with URIs Those URIs point to more things or relate things back to things we already know (Joe) Jira
  • I call this the 30,000 feet view and the previous example the 3 inch view. So taking a giant leap back, here’s what you get (in a way) at a global scale.
  • Highlights the different between Linked Data and how OSLC enhances and builds off it. When we have linked data (liked W3C Linked Data Platform), OSLC provides: Resource types and properties (vocabularies) based on scenarios An easy way to embed a fragment of HTML (link preview) into another application using standard HTTP content negotiation A way to take another web application’s (tool’s) web UI’s creation and selection dialog and embed them into your own
  • DevOps in Cloud OSLC Integration

    1. 1. © 2013 IBM Corporation1 DevOps in the Cloud: Addressing Integration Challenges Open Services for Lifecycle Collaboration Lifecycle integration inspired by the web Steve Speicher – IBM Rational STSM, OSLC and Linked Lifecycle Data @sspeiche
    2. 2. © 2013 IBM Corporation2 Agenda
    3. 3. © 2013 IBM Corporation 1. Background and “The” Problem
    4. 4. © 2013 IBM Corporation4 Software delivery is critical to success 86% of companies believe software delivery is important or critical 25% leverage software delivery effectively today But only… Source: “The Software Edge: How effective software development drives competitive advantage,” IBM Institute of Business Value, March 2013 69% outperform those who don’t of those who leverage software delivery today
    5. 5. © 2013 IBM Corporation5 Client challenges to accelerate software delivery Development/ Test Operations/ Production Business OwnersCustomers Agile Development Develop Deploy Test Stable Operations Monitor Release Optimize 41% experience development delays 34% experience deployment delays 45% experience production delays 4-6weeks to deliver code changes PlanFast and continuous innovation
    6. 6. © 2013 IBM Corporation6 Accelerate Software Delivery Balance speed, cost, quality and risk Reduce time to customer feedback DevOps 6 Continuous Innovation, Feedback and Improvements DevOps Lifecycle Operations/ Production Development/ TestCustomers Business Owners Definition: Enterprise capability for continuous software delivery that enables clients to seize market opportunities and reduce time to customer feedback
    7. 7. © 2013 IBM Corporation7 6 Factors of High Performing DevOps teams Track and Plan everything Version everything Automate everything Test everything Audit and Monitor everything Dashboard everything Application Artifacts Application Code Application Code Instrumentation and Configuration Instrumentation and Configuration Runtime Environment Definition Runtime Environment Definition Dev Test Ops Version Automate Test Track and Plan Audit and Monitor Dashboard
    8. 8. © 2009 IBM Corporation A DevOps approach DevOps Foundation Open Lifecycle and Service Management Integration Platform DevOps Lifecycle Operations/ProductionDevelopment/TestCustomers Business Owners Continuous Innovation, Feedback and Improvements Ecosystem BestPractices Monitor and Optimize Plan and Measure Develop and Test Release and Deploy OSLC
    9. 9. © 2009 IBM Corporation IBM DevOps Reference Architecture Monitor and OptimizeRelease and DeployDevelop and Test Mobile Cloud Social Intelligent Devices Developer Communities SecurityBig Data Expert Systems EcoSystem ImplementationServices Industry DevOps Foundation (enabled by the Jazz Platform) Deployment Platforms (PaaS, IaaS, Physical Infrastructure) TOSCA Linked DataOSLC
    10. 10. © 2009 IBM Corporation Line of Business SmartCloud Orchestrator IBM Pure Application System Openstack Jenkins Rational Build Forge uBuild IBM DevOps Tool Chain Plan and Measure Develop and Test Release and Deploy Monitor and Optimize Rational Focal Point Rational Requirements Composer Rational Team Concert Rational Quality Manager Rational Test Workbench Rational Test Virtualization Server SmartCloud Control Desk SmartCloud Application Performance Management See an integration need?
    11. 11. © 2013 IBM Corporation No consensus driven approach No external review No visibility into solution Built after the fact with limited product APIs Solution focuses on 2 tools in hand License fees Fear of giving up IP Forces alternative solutions Limited Participation Restrictive Participation Need for Open Collaboration on Solutions Past Integration Approaches Have Fallen Short No open process for others to join in Limits solution to particular use cases and technologies Limited to small set of business partners Lack of transparency Restrictive licenses and intellectual property Point-to-point integrations
    12. 12. © 2013 IBM Corporation Universal metadata standard “How did I ever think all those vendors would be able to agree?” Single repository “Can I really expect one vendor to provide all the functionality I need? And what about my existing tools?” Point-to-point integrations “How can I ever upgrade one tool without breaking everything else?” Standard implementations “Did I really believe that every vendor would rewrite their tools on a single framework?” Limited choice and coverage Slow to emerge and disruptive to adopt Need for a Better Solution Past Integration Approaches Have Fallen Short
    13. 13. © 2013 IBM Corporation 2. A Simple Solution
    14. 14. © 2013 IBM Corporation14 The Executive Summary: OSLC’s Simple Solution Automation Monitoring Increased traceability Architecture of the Web Linked Data Increased reuse Standard Interfaces Better visibility “Just Enough” integration Decreased maintenance costs Users can work seamlessly across their tools (complex and fragile synchronization schemes not required) OSLC is an open and scalable approach to lifecycle integration. It simplifies key integration scenarios across heterogeneous tools
    15. 15. © 2013 IBM Corporation15 OSLC Automation  2.0 provides support for common and simple REST- based automation pattern  Motivated by scenarios from DevOps, Continuous Integration, Deployment, Test Execution  Implementations rolling in – Jazz for Service Management – Rational Quality Manager – Tivoli Workload Scheduler – ….*
    16. 16. © 2013 IBM Corporation16 OperationsDevelopment Incidents (e.g. IBM Smart Cloud Control Desk) Management and Monitoring Data Center S e r v e r S e r v e r S e r v e r S e r v e r S e r v e r S e r v e r OSLC Interactions Defects (e. g. IBM Rational Team Concert) • Align IT operations and development teams. • Allow teams to work seamlessly with the tools the are familiar with. • Remove the need to synchronize data across tools. • Based on OSLC Change Management 2.0 Tracing Problems from Ops into Dev
    17. 17. © 2013 IBM Corporation17 Cloud Application Lifecycle w/ OSLC and TOSCA Leverages TOSCA, OSLC Asset Management and use OSLC interaction See demo and more at
    18. 18. © 2013 IBM Corporation 3. OSLC Community and Vision
    19. 19. © 2013 IBM Corporation19 OSLC: Standardizing the sharing of lifecycle data Open Services for Lifecycle Collaboration Lifecycle integration inspired by the web Linked Data Platform Working Group Inspired by the web Proven Free to use and share Open Changing the industry InnovativeOSLC: Generally applicable: specs available for many domains covering ALM, DevOps, ISM, and PLM Leading choice for strategic integration technology Scenario-driven & Solution-oriented OSLC Member Section The Resource for OSLC Implementers Based on and Shaping the Future of Internet Architecture Open and Independent Governance and Leadership
    20. 20. © 2013 IBM Corporation20 HistoryCommunitygovernanceofOSLC IBM de facto governance (with community support) Steering committee Multi-organization steering committee established New governance model introduced OASIS Internationally recognized independent SDO Formal support from 22 organizations (at launch) Participation governed by established OASIS model June 2012 May 2013 2012
    21. 21. © 2013 IBM Corporation21 OASIS OSLC Co-Founders
    22. 22. © 2013 IBM Corporation22 Why OSLC Standardization Matters
    23. 23. © 2013 IBM Corporation23 Aspirations for OSLC *Defined by OSLC Steering Committee
    24. 24. © 2013 IBM Corporation24 Approved Standard Approved Standard The Organizational Vision for OSLC OSLC Member Section at OASIS Steering Committee Technical Committees Forums ~~~ ~~..~~ Implementer’s Expo News Resources and Tutorials Eclipse Lyo OSLC4NetLibraries Test Suites Samples and Examples Reference Implementations W3C LDP WG Use what you need, share what you can. User Groups Subcommittees
    25. 25. © 2013 IBM Corporation 4. Not Done Yet
    26. 26. © 2013 IBM Corporation26 How to Participate in OSLC Today Get active at Complete a Members Agreement and get listed on the Organizations page Join a User Group to help define scenarios Join a Work Group to help define the version 3 specifications Start discussing your ideas and voicing your opinions As a CSCC Working Group for DevOps? On the OSLC Member Section mailing list On the OSLC Forums Get involved in the Steering Committee election Stand for election Make sure your organization votes Be a co-founder of the Core TC
    27. 27. © 2013 IBM Corporation 5. Questions and Discussion For more about OSLC visit
    28. 28. © 2013 IBM Corporation backup
    29. 29. © 2013 IBM Corporation29 The Basics: What is OSLC, and why should I care? OSLC is an open community building practical specifications for integrating software OSLC is beneficial to many stakeholders Contributing Organizations:
    30. 30. © 2013 IBM Corporation30 OSLC inside OASIS OSLC Member Section 5+ OASIS Members are the founders Other OASIS Members can join when they choose OASIS Steering Committee1 Technical Architecture TC2 Technical Architecture TC2 1. The current OSLC Steering Committee becomes the OASIS OSLC Member Section Steering Committee 2. The Core workgroup becomes the Technical Architecture TC (Technical Committee). 3. Domain TCs are created by composing several OSLC domain workgroups. 4. Subcommittees may be created by the Steering Committee for a number of purposes. E.g. scenario development and prioritization or exploration of new domains ahead of creating a new TC. Domain TCDomain TC Domain TCDomain TC Domain TC3Domain TC3 Subcommittee Subcommittee Subcommittee4 advises guides <relationship> overseesoversees
    31. 31. © 2013 IBM Corporation31 Linked Data – Defined by Tim Berners-Lee 1. Use URIs as names for things 2. Use HTTP URIs so that people can look up those names. 3. When someone looks up a URI, provide useful information, using the standards (RDF*, SPARQL) 4. Include links to other URIs. so that they can discover more things. He concludes this with: “Simple.” Reference: “Linked Data”, Tim Berners-Lee, 2006-07-27
    32. 32. © 2013 IBM Corporation32 Linked Data – What is it? TestCase 14 is blocked by Issue 973 http://srv/qm/tc/14 qm:blockedBy Joe is a committer for Apache doap:committer 32
    33. 33. © 2013 IBM Corporation33 Linked Data – What is it? TestCase 14 is blocked by Issue 973 http://srv/qm/tc/14 qm:blockedBy Issue 973 depends on Bug 318 cm:dependsOn Joe is a committer for Apache doap:committer Issue 973 is owned by Joe dc:contributor
    34. 34. © 2013 IBM Corporation34 Linked Data – Bridging separate data sources (but with meaning) ource: Sept 2011 34
    35. 35. © 2013 IBM Corporation35 Lifecycle ToolLifecycle Tool ChangeChange ManagementManagement Lifecycle ToolLifecycle Tool Quality ManagementQuality Management Lifecycle ToolLifecycle Tool RequirementsRequirements ManagementManagement Service ManagementService Management Help DeskHelp Desk Service ManagementService Management DeploymentDeployment <http://cm/bugs/2314> a oslc_cm:ChangeRequest ; dcterms:relation <http://cm/bugs/1235>; oslc_cm:implementsRequirement <http://rm/req/56> . <http://rm/req/56> a oslc_rm:Requirement ; dcterms:title “Online shopping cart”; oslc_rm:validatedBy <http://qm/tc/17> . Common Resource Definitions Link Preview Delegated Dialogs OSLC – Based on Linked Data