[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [tosca-comment] Re: Comments on Version 1.2, Public Review Draft 01
Hi Oliver, A very Happy New Year, to you, as well! Please pardon the brevity (I'm rushing out), but you should find the Comment Resolution Log at the link below. Please feel free to contact me directly should you wish to discuss further. https://www.oasis-open.org/committees/document.php?document_id=63338&wg_abbrev=tosca Regards, Paul -----Original Message----- From: tosca-comment@lists.oasis-open.org <tosca-comment@lists.oasis-open.org> On Behalf Of Oliver Kopp Sent: Wednesday, January 16, 2019 3:15 PM To: tosca-comment@lists.oasis-open.org Subject: [tosca-comment] Re: Comments on Version 1.2, Public Review Draft 01 Hi and a late happy new year, I saw progress in releasing a new version. I searched my mail archive, but could not find comments on our comments on Version 1.2, Public Review Draft 01 posted on 2018-02-19. Is there any issue tracker where I can easily lookup the changes/actions taken? TYIA! Cheers, Oliver Am Mo., 19. Feb. 2018 um 00:17 Uhr schrieb Oliver Kopp <kopp.dev@gmail.com>: > > Hi, > > While working on a converter from TOSCA XML to TOSCA YAML, we encountered following issues: > > > ## Artifact Properties > > - Line 1849 states that Artifact Types have properties. > - Section 3.6.7 (Lines 1188 to 1214) define an Artifact > > An Artifact does not have a "Property Assignment" > > We think that this should be added. That would be then consistent with "Node templates", which also have a property assignment "for assigning values to named properties (...) defined in their corresponding name types." (Lines 1329 and 1330). > > > ## Types of Artifacts > > The extended notation of an Artifact definition (Section 3.6.7.2.2, starting at Line 1200) requires the specification of a type (Line 1206). The short notation does not. This feels a bit inconsistent. Does one always need the type? Does one always know from the file extension which file type it is? Is ".zip" always a "ZIP" file? If yes, why does the extended notation require the type? Why is it not optional? -- I think, it should be always possible to convert a short notation in an extended one. This is not the case here. > > > ## Artifact Files > > According to Line 1194, an Artifact can contain a single file only. In TOSCA XML 1.0, artifacts could reference multiple files. See lines 2610 to 2618. > > In the general sense (and outlined in the example on page 18), it makes sense. However, what if I want to attach source code somehow? One could also think of an installer with a checksum file. I assume, I "just" have to ZIP the files to comply with the specification. Having a one-to-one relation of artifact and file seems to be an intuitive one. > > > ## Outputs of operations > > Section 3.6.15 (starting from Line 1492) defines Operations. An operation has inputs only. What about outputs? We think that it should be possible to specify the interface completely. Only specifying the inputs explicitly and relying on "get_operation_output" does not seem enough. How can one now which values to read using "get_operation_output"? > > > ## Relationship templates > > Section 3.8.4 (starting at Line 2224) defines Relationship templates. In case I have four node templates in my topology (n1, n2, n3, n4), where each par can be connected by the same relationship type. Let's say: n1 -> r12 -> n2, n3 -> r34 -> n4. How can I give r12 different properties than r34? The TOSCA XML spec used to have "source" and "target" for relationship templates. I don't find an equivalent in the YAML 1.2 PRD. "source" seems to be used for inheritance (line 2215). > > Put in different words: How can I specify a topology graph using TOSCA YAML? > > > ## Workflows > > I cannot find the terms "BPEL" and "BPMN" in the specification. It should be allowed to use de-facto BPM languages also in TOSCA. > > Side note: The graph on Line 3654 reminds one of graphs defined in BPEL. We once worked on a simple notation for BPEL at https://nam03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fbpelscript.org%2F&data=02%7C01%7C%7C2531b772d1114090e87208d67bef6e64%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C636832665605706148&sdata=Ep4cuLDlUfdtdnabX618J7kSoSXzenvrz7ENyEw9LTk%3D&reserved=0. I am not sure whether YAML is a proper serialization of workflows. https://nam03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fballerinalang.org%2F&data=02%7C01%7C%7C2531b772d1114090e87208d67bef6e64%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C636832665605706148&sdata=5t91Nzr6SWjywJEAPk6lakW%2FIg1O0OngghqH6eC7fMI%3D&reserved=0 is another hot candidate for an orchestration language. > > > ## Description field > > In Section 5.9.14.1, Line 3411, the field "description" is used for > both a capability and a requirement. Capability definitions have this > field (1744), but requirement definitions do not (Line 1786) > > > ## Operation implementation > > Section 3.6.14 (starting on line 1453). Line 1457 defines "primary" of type "Artifact definition", but Line 1462 allows the short notation "primary artifact name". The table at line 1457 should also list that type, shouldn't it? > > > ## Wrong reference: Interface assignments do not exist > > Line 2132 (Section 3.8.2.2.3) shows "interface_assignments" linking to "3.6.16 Interface definition". Possibly the text at Line 2132 is just wrong. > > > ## Impossible short notation > > For the "Property Filter" definition, there is a short notation offered at line 1130 (Section 3.6.4.1.1). We think, this short notation is not possible, as a "constraint clause" is itself a key/value pair. So "example: greater: 2" is invalid YAML, isn't it? > > > ## Missing tosca.entity.Root > > - tosca.interfaces.Root derves from tosca.entity.Root (line 3226) > - tosca.nodes.Root derives from tosca.entity.Root (line 3310) > > However, the spec does not define tosca.entity.Root > > > ## Missing intro table at tosca.nodes.DBMS > > All TOSCA types present a table with "shorthand_name", > "type_qualified_name" and "type_uri". This is missing at Section 5.9.7 > (should come after Line 3357) > > > ## Inconsistent text > > Section 3.7.4.1, Line 1849: The table has "mime_type" as not required, but the text reads "The required mime type". Same for "file_ext". > > > > BTW: The current Java model for TOSCA YAML is available at https://nam03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Feclipse%2Fwinery%2Ftree%2Fmaster%2Forg.eclipse.winery.model.tosca.yaml&data=02%7C01%7C%7C2531b772d1114090e87208d67bef6e64%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C636832665605706148&sdata=%2BnhPdmeq3kJnDmW%2BV7hAXPG2KHrL5nJyS8CqHQB9sIw%3D&reserved=0. Since there is still not an official Eclipse Winery release, one has to use https://nam03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fjitpack.io%2F&data=02%7C01%7C%7C2531b772d1114090e87208d67bef6e64%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C636832665605706148&sdata=VRVugVtGkD8C%2BWu0WTcn%2BGTMJ8z%2FJCGDVfvmBWjRMFM%3D&reserved=0 to get the JARs into his implementation. > > > We are open for discussions. > > Greetings from Stuttgart, > > Oliver > -- > https://nam03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgith > ub.com%2Fkoppor%2F&data=02%7C01%7C%7C2531b772d1114090e87208d67bef6 > e64%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C636832665605706148&am > p;sdata=xRBDK7Btuj1VqTG9ZZoGBz6uGGhsXYhSEQZMaY7OjNg%3D&reserved=0 > > > The views and opinions expressed in this feedback are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of the University of Stuttgart or any affiliated institutes or persons. -- This publicly archived list offers a means to provide input to the OASIS Topology and Orchestration Specification for Cloud Applications (TOSCA) TC. In order to verify user consent to the Feedback License terms and to minimize spam in the list archive, subscription is required before posting. Subscribe: tosca-comment-subscribe@lists.oasis-open.org Unsubscribe: tosca-comment-unsubscribe@lists.oasis-open.org List help: tosca-comment-help@lists.oasis-open.org List archive: https://nam03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Flists.oasis-open.org%2Farchives%2Ftosca-comment%2F&data=02%7C01%7C%7C2531b772d1114090e87208d67bef6e64%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C636832665605706148&sdata=wnxLslG8IBEMAETisazhVbIUfWTJBZQTREgav75IrB4%3D&reserved=0 Feedback License: https://nam03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.oasis-open.org%2Fwho%2Fipr%2Ffeedback_license.pdf&data=02%7C01%7C%7C2531b772d1114090e87208d67bef6e64%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C636832665605706148&sdata=vXV%2BYqiT7h1c%2BBRYKsUdHNVi6epmDSRylnngBWvBeZk%3D&reserved=0 List Guidelines: https://nam03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.oasis-open.org%2Fmaillists%2Fguidelines.php&data=02%7C01%7C%7C2531b772d1114090e87208d67bef6e64%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C636832665605706148&sdata=jx4GV3ved0Pf8eCbj1oupjztcZ25vXrhrXvGxkaIFJg%3D&reserved=0 Committee: https://nam03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.oasis-open.org%2Fcommittees%2Ftosca&data=02%7C01%7C%7C2531b772d1114090e87208d67bef6e64%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C636832665605706148&sdata=yVbRSd8YIUiozJo7GBTF2f9b8ZbXU8uo%2F8%2FdkA0BYWw%3D&reserved=0 Join OASIS: https://nam03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.oasis-open.org%2Fjoin%2F&data=02%7C01%7C%7C2531b772d1114090e87208d67bef6e64%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C636832665605706148&sdata=FqdU5LWNO6161C70aM%2BHJbxY7fMAqIdxFmA5JIFZig8%3D&reserved=0
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]