Talk:Configuration item

Computing Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Technology

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Technology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.TechnologyWikipedia:WikiProject TechnologyTemplate:WikiProject TechnologyTechnology articles

Systems Low‑importance

	Systems science portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Systems, which collaborates on articles related to systems and systems science.SystemsWikipedia:WikiProject SystemsTemplate:WikiProject SystemsSystems articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is within the field of Systems engineering.

Updating[edit]

There are many broken links in this page. Suggest updating, or removing URL reference. Iamthezio (talk) 14:45, 28 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This page is software-specific. Is that right? m.e. 10:43, 17 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Should this page also mention what is meant by Configuration Items in an ITIL/CMDB context? --Pete 08:40, 17 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, this page is from a software engineering paradigm rather than a Systems Engineering paradigm. Kommando (talk) 12:22, 15 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

End items[edit]

Is a configuration item in any way related in concept to an end item, from the world of bill of materials? 70.247.170.9 (talk) 22:16, 18 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"coalface" (used in the fourth paragraph) is an idiom that I wasn't familiar with and had to look up. Could "an individual at the coalface of implementation" perhaps be replaced by "an individual responsible for implementation", making it somewhat simpler and easier to understand? 173.15.198.73 (talk) 13:44, 12 October 2010 (UTC) Ed Denham —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.15.198.73 (talk) 13:38, 12 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

People[edit]

People can be configuration items? I have never heard of such a use of the term, and I challenge its validity. Can someone justify this? 67.69.19.58 (talk) 14:30, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

While I can't give you a yea or nay, I suspect that in a HR organizational sense, people can be organized in such a way that they can be considered "configuration items". 70.251.241.131 (talk) 23:57, 7 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You are correct. People are not Configuration Items. ITIL is about "people, process, and technology". CIs apply to the technology. People manipulate the technology using the defined processes. Also see EIA-649-B Configuration Management Standard, which defines a Configuration Item as "An aggregation of hardware, software, firmware or any discrete portion thereof that satisfies an end use function, and is designated for separate configuration management (i.e., it has specified requirements, and is an item to which the effectivity of changes is addressed). See GEIA-HB-649, Annex 9, for a full discussion on configuration items." I will update this page to correct this definition. Bennopia (talk) 00:42, 23 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Circular definition[edit]

This is a circular definition, therefore next to useless. It would be useless if it did not provide any context. Leandro GFC Dutra (talk) 17:50, 27 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Article is mostly incorrect information[edit]

This article appears to be based off one user's misunderstanding of one company's implementation of configuration management.

Please see SAE document EIA-649B "Configuration Management Standard" for a guide aimed specifically towards manufacturing, which this Wikipedia article claims is impossible.

From the article: "CIs cannot be used in manufacturing sectors as it doesn't have any scope to include such configurations." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.168.6.143 (talk) 15:31, 29 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Configuration item. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20051029122355/http://www.marcorsyscom.usmc.mil/sites/cmnav/CMNav/Functional-Configuration-Audit.asp to http://www.marcorsyscom.usmc.mil/sites/cmnav/CMNav/Functional-Configuration-Audit.asp

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:34, 12 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]