Ethics of Extending CMDB Tables to Avoid Purchasing Tables

[William Busby]

I just left a project largely because I was uncomfortable with how the team had approached their architectural design. They had a contract to build an application for the US Air Force and they decided to use tables extended from [cmdb_ci] to manage costs and avoid an app engine license. 

I guess I'm looking to know if I'm the a$$h0l3 for walking away from a lucrative position just b/c I felt what was being done was wrong. We all know you can extend the CMDB tables for free but, to me, that's only b/c ServiceNow can't predict every type of CI in existence. So you can extend the CMDB but only to accommodate new CI classes, not application tables that aren't CI related. Right? Or do you believe this is ethical and I'm an a$$h0l3 for leavng them in a lurch?

[atripathy]

Hi William,

Great to have your opinion on the topic, something I haven't been able to conclude either way, for quite some time. To start with, I don't particularly agree to a table level licensing model unless the storage goes through the roof. You are only limiting the possibilities and innovation by adding one more constraint in the customization journey. At the same time, the CMDB doesn't cater to all niche domains and hence many of the companies may not be able to leverage the power of CMDB, but that doesn't give them a discount, does it? If anything, it takes them longer to define a data model that works for them at certain maturity level. 

I see your point, but one part of me tells me it is just fine. You have purchased a module, you are paying per user, so use it as you deem fit. If you are able to build and use the whole application by extending cmdb table, I give it you for making the most out of your available resources.😊