[OASIS Issue Tracker] (CAMP-175) Could remove "artifacts" or make them optional

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

    [ https://issues.oasis-open.org/browse/CAMP-175?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=60385#comment-60385 ] 

Mike Norman commented on CAMP-175:
----------------------------------

So, a typical use case is the binding of a component (such as an instantiated WAR file) to a pre-instantiated service (e.g. a message broker) which is shared by multiple components.  The PaaS typically provides some mechanism of instantiating the service, and allows the lifecycle of the service instance to be decoupled from the lifecycle of any of the components that bind to it. I think Alex is suggesting that there needs to be some notion of "running" a standalone service, by specifying a plan which contains only service specifications not artifact specifications.

> Could remove "artifacts" or make them optional
> ----------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: CAMP-175
>                 URL: https://issues.oasis-open.org/browse/CAMP-175
>             Project: OASIS Cloud Application Management for Platforms (CAMP) TC
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: Spec
>    Affects Versions: 1.2
>            Reporter: Alex Heneveld
>            Assignee: Alex Heneveld
>            Priority: Minor
>
> Some people we've talked to find the "artifacts" entry point for the plan confusing. Personally I like it and IMHO it *should* become the standard way to do things.
> But right now people mostly seem to be building things up and so the "services" entry point is preferred -- look at how docker/fig/compose do it, and cloud foundry, and apache brooklyn.
> To simplify we could remove all mention of "artifacts" or make them optional.
> Or not ... this is just something to be aware of.



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.2.2#6258)