Udam Dewaraja

Added the following comment to Naseer's point in #48 "Very much interested in adding that next level detail into FOCUS for billing purposes. For the initial version of FOCUS, we...

Very much interested in adding that next level detail into FOCUS for billing purposes. For the initial version of FOCUS, we started with the highest level categorization but the need...

@joshk0 Is this something you can lead the discussion on with the community? Slack, Member meetings, and FOCUS feedback sessions are all options for engaging.

This is being discussed as a possible metadata column that can later be added explicitly by providers to the dataset OR post-processed by consumers if they find this valuable. Leaving...

@flanakin Could we please re-create this with the new feedback template.

@ijurica Should we close this out? and create new if we still think this is needed?

I think this is related to #296. The direction we go on that issue should help us decide if columns that (some|most) providers don't support can be made to column...

A couple of questions here: - invoice information may not come till after the month - which could be a problem unless we're saying its unavoidable that you will have...

Could we split the issue into two here? One is about billing account naming (which we went through a long exercise previously and settled on given that there weren't any...

> @kk09v We provide x_ResourceGroupName, so you'll have that for Microsoft data. +1. Nothing is lost if it's available in the provider data.