<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xml:base="http://www.itskeptic.org"  xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">
<channel>
 <title>The IT Skeptic - Comments for &quot;The CMDB is dead&quot;</title>
 <link>http://www.itskeptic.org/cmdb-dead</link>
 <description>Comments for &quot;The CMDB is dead&quot;</description>
 <language>en</language>
<item>
 <title>The term CMDB should be dead!</title>
 <link>http://www.itskeptic.org/cmdb-dead#comment-7540</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;I used to look at ITskeptic years ago, as I found it useful to work out was I the only one frustrated by the mis-communication about the term CMDB. Since then I &#039;ve been removing almost all references to &quot;CMDB&quot; from literature and presentation as everyone had a different understanding and it confuses everyone. Rather than having meeting debating &quot;I thought a CMDB was&quot; we focus instead of inventory/asset management, or mapping systems to services, or maybe working how to make it easy for project teams to fill in change forms with consistent risk understanding. &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Drop the term cmdb and hey presto - you might get something delivered that people can use as part of their day job!&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Oh - another tip. Anything to do with configuration management is manual, with automation easing some aspects. Automation can cover discovery, verification, consolidation, rules management, lookups, presentation, reporting, etc. Or in other words  automation requires lots of manual work you never did before as well!&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Always a skeptic&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Dave&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
 <pubDate>Sun, 07 Nov 2010 10:02:46 +0000</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>cotswolddave</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">comment 7540 at http://www.itskeptic.org</guid>
</item>
</channel>
</rss>
