Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

Section 6.4 - Rule189: CIM Model Managers should reevaluate #16

Open
tviegut opened this issue Oct 31, 2023 · 0 comments
Open

Section 6.4 - Rule189: CIM Model Managers should reevaluate #16

tviegut opened this issue Oct 31, 2023 · 0 comments
Labels
cim mm consensus needed CIM Model Manager consensus needed documentation Improvements or additions to documentation question Further information is requested

Comments

@tviegut
Copy link
Contributor

tviegut commented Oct 31, 2023

@biverson62 commented:

This requirement should not be necessary when the extended CIM class exists within a User-Defined Package. The need for these types of “tags” exists only when the extensions are made within the TC57CIM (i.e. newly renamed CIM) package.
@tviegut tviegut added documentation Improvements or additions to documentation question Further information is requested cim mm consensus needed CIM Model Manager consensus needed labels Oct 31, 2023
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
cim mm consensus needed CIM Model Manager consensus needed documentation Improvements or additions to documentation question Further information is requested
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

No branches or pull requests
1 participant
@tviegut