[ripe-db-requirements-tf] @EXT: RE: Requirements for the RIPE Database... or Databases?

All,

Bijal:

 > > > I believe we should cover all databases that come under the RIPE
 > > > Database umbrella today and as part of our role we should review
 > > > their role and need. It would be good to hear what others think,
 > > > should our work cover ALL databases within the RIPE database? Is
 > > > there agreement here?

On 05/11/2019 20.44, james at kennedyipam.com james at kennedyipam.com wrote:
>  > Do we want to explicitly say that we are making requirements for 
> separate databases? (Probably with separate requirements.)
> 
> IMO yes we must cover all databases that comprise the commonly known 
> 'RIPE Database' - probably with separate requirements.
> 
> I also agree we should review the purpose of the RIPE Database (as a 
> whole) in the eyes of today's stakeholders and their requirements.

It sounds like we all agree that there are different databases, and that 
we must address them all.

It also sounds like there is not much interest in explicitly having 
different requirements for each type of database. I think this is going 
to make our lives more difficult, because it means that we're going to 
end up with conflicting (and possibly irreconcilable) requirements from 
different types of users. But we can always revisit this decision if 
that happens, and decide to split the databases at that point. 😉

I think the next step is to document our various stakeholders. I'll have 
a go at writing that up tonight when dealing with jetlag unless someone 
gets to it first....

Cheers,

--
Shane