[OASIS Issue Tracker] Created: (CAMP-153) Two approaches to identify services in a DP?

[OASIS Issues Tracker <workgroup_mailer@lists.oasis-open.org>]

Two approaches to identify services in a DP?
--------------------------------------------

                 Key: CAMP-153
                 URL: http://tools.oasis-open.org/issues/browse/CAMP-153
             Project: OASIS Cloud Application Management for Platforms (CAMP) TC
          Issue Type: Bug
          Components: Spec
         Environment: CAMP Version 1.1 Draft 32 (dated: 5 December 2013).
            Reporter: Martin Chapman 


This is 2) from https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/camp-comment/201312/msg00000.html

"
2) Is there a reason why there should be two approaches to identify services in a DP?
Example 4 in Section 4.2.2.1 demonstrates one approach. In this the "service" section
is not explicitly called out. It is defined under the "fulfillment" section which 
is hidden under the "RequirementType" relation.
Example 5 demonstrates second approach. In this the "services" section is explicitly called out.

I feel that services should be a first class entity of a DP, and providing an abstraction to
explicitly identify them would make that status clear. Therefore, approach shown in example 5
is better than that in example 4, imo. Is there any reason to keep both approaches?
If not, can the spec be prescriptive about one approach (my vote is for approach in example 5)."

-- 
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators: http://tools.oasis-open.org/issues/secure/Administrators.jspa
-
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira