Re: [sca-assembly] [NEW ISSUE] Assembly specification unclear onContribution vs Deployment - when can errors in artifacts be reported?

[Simon Nash <oasis@cjnash.com>]

See comment inline.

   Simon

Mike Edwards wrote:
> 
> Raiser:                        Mike Edwards
> 
> Target:                        sca-assembly-1.1-spec-cd03.pdf
> 
> Description:
> 
> The Assembly Model spec does not have a clear distinction between the 
> state of a Contribution being contributed to the Domain
> and the process of deploying one or more artifacts from that Contribution.
> 
> The particular problem that has emerged when building the testcases for 
> the Assembly spec is that it is necessary to define when
> it is valid to raise an error relating to an artifact that is in error.
> 
> It is necessary to say that it is NOT valid to raise an error for an 
> artifact that is in error when it is merely present within a Contribution
> that is contributed to the Domain.  Only artifacts that are actually 
> deployed can be checked for static errors - and so this can only
> take place when deployment occurs.
> 
> Proposal:
> 
> Add a new section to the spec after line 3649 as follows:
> 
> 11.3. States of Artifacts in the Domain
> 
> Artifacts in the SCA domain are in one of 3 states:
> 
> 1. Installed
> 2. Deployed
> 3. Running
> 
> Installed artifacts are artifacts that are part of a Contribution that 
> is installed into the Domain.
> Installed artifacts are available for use by other artifacts that are 
> deployed, See "install Contribution"
> and "remove Contribution" to understand how artifacts are installed and 
> uninstalled.
> 
> Deployed artifacts are artifacts that the SCA runtime is given to 
> execute.  Artifacts are deployed
> either through explicit deployment actions or through the presence of 
> <deployable/> elements
> in sca-contribution.xml files within a Contribution. If an artifact is 
> deployed which has dependencies
> on other artifacts, then those dependent artifacts are also deployed.
> 
> When the SCA runtime has one or more deployable artifacts, the runtime 
> attempts to put those artifacts
> and any artifacts they depend on into the Running state.  This can fail 
> due to errors in one or more of the artifacts
> or the process can be delayed until all dependencies are available.
> 
> 11.3.1
> 
> Checking for errors in artifacts MUST NOT be done for artifacts in the 
> Installed state (ie where the artifacts are
> simply part of installed contributions] {ASM120xx]
> 
This seems over-restrictive.  For example, what about malformed artifacts
such as .composite files with XML syntax errors?  It might be useful to
inform the user about such problems when the artifacts are installed, but
the proposed rule would apparently prohibit an SCA runtime from even
discovering these problems at installation time.  I think a better rule
would be to allow such errors to be detected as long as this does not
prevent any artifacts from being deployed.  For example: Any errors in
artifacts in the Installed state (i.e., where the artifacts are part of
installed contributions and have not been deployed) MUST NOT prevent the
SCA runtime from deploying artifacts.

   Simon

> Errors in artifacts MUST be detected either during the Deployment of the 
> artifacts, or during the process of putting the
> artifacts into the Running state, {ASM120xx]
> 
> 
> 
> Yours,  Mike.
> 
> Strategist - Emerging Technologies, SCA & SDO.
> Co Chair OASIS SCA Assembly TC.
> IBM Hursley Park, Mail Point 146, Winchester, SO21 2JN, Great Britain.
> Phone & FAX: +44-1962-818014    Mobile: +44-7802-467431  
> Email:  mike_edwards@uk.ibm.com
> 
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> /
> /
> 
> /Unless stated otherwise above:
> IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number 
> 741598.
> Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU/
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>