From: Chris Schlaeger (cs_at_suse.de)
Date: Fri Jul 30 2004 - 17:31:43 CEST
From: Chris Schlaeger <cs@suse.de> Date: Fri, 30 Jul 2004 17:31:43 +0200 Message-Id: <200407301731.45423.cs@suse.de> Subject: Re: [taskjuggler-devel] TaskJuggler - Hardware Resources?
On Friday 30 July 2004 17:25, Matthias Welwarsky wrote:
> On Friday 30 July 2004 16:31, Chris Schlaeger wrote:
> > On Saturday 24 July 2004 22:53, Matthias Welwarsky wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > is it possible to somehow specify and allocate a hardware resource?
> > >
> > > When doing e.g. embedded linux projects, the development usually starts
> > > with a limited count of target hardware. Normally, there are only a few
> > > evaluation modules available that need to be scheduled between
> > > developers. Much later in the project the final hardware becomes
> > > available, again limited in number.
> > >
> > > These "hardware" resources don't directly contribute to the effort
> > > done, that means it is not possible to model them via a "human"
> > > resource. Still, they are in most cases mandatory for a task, and also
> > > exclusively allocated until the task is completed.
> > >
> > > I did not find a possibility to model such resources in taskjuggler, is
> > > this possible atm?
> >
> > Why do you think that the current TJ resources do not work? They are
> > abstract and not limited to human persons. Simply set the rate to 0 and
> > this should model what you need.
>
> But isn't "rate" only about cost? "maxeffort" or "load" cannot be set to
> 0, 0.125 seems to be minimum. Also, if I set maxeffort to 0, wouldn't TJ
> assume that the resource cannot be allocated, according to the
> documentation?
I'm not sure I understand what you want to achive. Setting maxeffort or load
to 0 is essentially like not allocation a resource at all. What would be the
purpose of this?
> There's another fact to consider: If a "hardware" resource is allocated to
> a task, that doesn't mean that the task can be started without a "human"
> resource. You have to work around that by always allocating human resources
> as "mandatory" together with "hardware": those two types do not form
> alternatives.
Do you only want to allocate "hardware" when a human resource gets allocated?
Than making the human resource mandatory is the right way to do this.
Chris
>
> regards,
> matthias
>
> ___________________________________________________________________________
>_
>
> This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and
> are intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to which
> they are addressed. Access to this e-mail by anyone else is unauthorised.
> If you are not the intended recipient, any disclosure, copying,
> distribution or any action taken or omitted to be taken in reliance on it,
> is prohibited. E-mail messages are not necessarily secure. Archos does not
> accept responsibility for any changes made to this message after it was
> sent.
-- Chris Schlaeger, VP Research & Development, SUSE Linux - A Novell Business GPG Key: 1024D/0500838B A5FE C051 2AFC 9A14 768A 5125 5829 5750 0500 838B
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.7 : Fri Jul 30 2004 - 17:35:02 CEST