[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [tosca-interop] Uploaded initial sample ServiceTemplate for SugarCRM
> I think we will come to the more advanced > samples during our interop work. That's been my sense, too. Good to be on the same page! Best, -Tobias On Sep 16, 2012, at 23:32, Thomas Spatzier <thomas.spatzier@de.ibm.com> wrote: > Hi Tobias, > > first of all, good that you have looked at the sample in detail - the more > review we get the better :-) > > On your use case where different workload have different requirements > (Apache only vs. Apache with mod_php): I indeed think this should be > covered by wd-11 (as you say in your previous mail). > One thing we are playing around with in our implementation is also the > concept of building more abstract NodeTypes (e.g. something like WebTier > instead of something as concrete as Apache httpd) that expose certain > capabilities against which application requirements can bind. Then there > can be multiple separate service templates that kind of implement the > abstract NodeTypes. Those separate service templates can specify the > "internal" components needed to provide the capabilities (e.g. httpd and > mod_php). > This first model we provided does not expose this feature yet, since we > wanted to start simple, but I think we will come to the more advanced > samples during our interop work. > > Regards, > Thomas > > > > From: Tobias Kunze <tkunze@redhat.com> > > To: Thomas Spatzier/Germany/IBM@IBMDE > > Cc: tosca-interop@lists.oasis-open.org > > Date: 16.09.2012 01:50 > > Subject: Re: [tosca-interop] Uploaded initial sample ServiceTemplate for SugarCRM > > > > > > > > On second thought, I just realized that said addressing is now implemented > using Requirement/Capability id attributes in RelationshipTemplates. Please > disregard my previous email. > > -Tobias > > >> Thomas- >> >> Thanks a lot for creating this, including the PPT. One thing I notice is > that the Capability/Requirement type attribute (if I understand it > correctly) won't be enough to actually identify a node type. We ran into > this with OpenShift. For instance, the topology could have two Apaches, > both providing a "ns1:WebAppContainerCapability" type Capability, let's say > one for a PHP app workload, the other to run a static web server. It is > important for the application workload node type to specify a specific > requirement on the Apache hosting mod_php. >> >> I can't tell off-hand whether our current Capability/Requirement > definition allows for that kind of addressing (wd11 seems to suggest it > doesn't). >> >> -Tobias >> >> >> On Sep 14, 2012, at 2:56, Mr. Thomas Spatzier > <thomas.spatzier@de.ibm.com> wrote: >> >>> Hi all, >>> >>> I just uploaded an initial sample TOSCA ServiceTemplate for the SugarCRM > use case according to wd-11 as input for the interop SC. >>> >>> The Cloud Service Archive (CSAR) can be found at this location: >>> > https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/tosca/download.php/46915/SugarCRM-20120914.zip > >>> >>> There is also a small chart deck that depicts some of the structure of > the ServiceTemplate to help understand the XML files: >>> > https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/tosca/download.php/46916/SugarCRM-20120914.pptx > >>> >>> Regards, >>> Thomas >> >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: tosca-interop-unsubscribe@lists.oasis-open.org >> For additional commands, e-mail: tosca-interop-help@lists.oasis-open.org >> > > >
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]