Hi @jeffabailey.

As part of #772 we recently went through the Intial patterns, to check which ones can be promoted to Structured.

For this source-code-inventory pattern we wrote these notes

• integrate the working knowledge from Philips
• find one more Known Instance (to have a more balanced view of how this pattern is applied in real-world scenarios)

Besides the number of known instances, there are also a couple of other content requirements that we check before leveling up a pattern to Structured. See the list in #765.

Is your org using this pattern? i.e. would you be able to contribute your knowledge to this pattern? It does require a bit of work but it would help us greatly if multiple different people could do this work.

As part of #772 we recently went through the Intial patterns, to check which ones can be promoted to Structured.

Great! I heard from @rrrutledge that the ISPO WG was asked to identify patterns that could be promoted.

Is your org using this pattern? i.e. would you be able to contribute your knowledge to this pattern? It does require a bit of work but it would help us greatly if multiple different people could do this work.

We are not, but we want to use it. My org is facing many of the problems listed in this pattern, and my legal teammate wants to solve the problems.

I'm working with several engineering teammates to apply some of the solutions listed in the pattern.

I attempted to build this using StackShare in the past, but they were bought by Fossa.

• Visualization in place to list all assets with options to filter based on meta-data

This is a pretty complex pattern, should we wait for Philips to integrate their working knowledge?

@jeffabailey I would recommend to leave this pattern in Initial for now, and try to get the current working knowledge from Philips integrated.

If we could then find a 2nd org to use this (maybe your org) then this should strengthen the pattern sufficiently to allow us to uplevel the pattern to Structured.

@jeffabailey I would recommend to leave this pattern in Initial for now, and try to get the current working knowledge from Philips integrated.

Sounds great, do you know who we should ask about the working knowledge at Philips?

That should be @dterol23, one of the original authors of the pattern. You also find him in our Slack.

@jeffabailey you closed this, rather than merging it. i.e. the minor fixes that were done in this branch are not part of the main branch now.

Was that intended?

If not, does GitHub show you the option to recover the branch (revert deletion)?

Yes, there were very tiny changes.

Only modifications to the case of words and file names.

The primary intent of the PR was to move to structured, but there's a lot of work to do in that direction.

Once I have time to drive this at work, I'll circle back again.

Right.

I had a local checkout of the branch. So I used #850 to integrate these minor improvements into the main line.
Just a little clean-up activity but still nice to get done :)

Looking forward to your future improvements to this!