[OASIS Issue Tracker] (TOSCA-136) CSD03 - Need rules to assure non-collision (uniqueness) of requirement or capability names

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

    [ https://issues.oasis-open.org/browse/TOSCA-136?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=59550#comment-59550 ] 

Sahdev Zala  commented on TOSCA-136:
------------------------------------

Per discussion on 05/07/2015 half a day meeting - 

Matt Rutkowski (IBM): we have noted in req. and cap defn that sections that it is an error if the same req or cap name appears more than once on the same node

Ref A6.1 and 6.2 cap and req definition section was added with comment.

> CSD03 - Need rules to assure non-collision (uniqueness) of requirement or capability names
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: TOSCA-136
>                 URL: https://issues.oasis-open.org/browse/TOSCA-136
>             Project: OASIS Topology and Orchestration Specification for Cloud Applications (TOSCA) TC
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: Profile-YAML
>    Affects Versions: CSD1
>            Reporter: Matthew Rutkowski 
>            Assignee: Thomas Spatzier 
>             Fix For: CSD03
>
>
> When defining node types/templates we allow authors to defined named requirements (or capabilities). How do we prevent (name) collision if we allow others to augment a type or template definition with their own requirements  or capabilities?
> For example,with the following node template:
> node_templates:
>   mysql:
>     type: tosca.nodes.MySQL
>     properties:
>       mysql_root_password: { get_input: my_mysql_rootpw }
>       mysql_port: { get_input: my_mysql_port }
>     requirements:
>       - host: db_server
> What happens of a second named requirement of "host" is added? 
> What happens if a new Node Type that derives from MySQL is created and attempts to use the requirement name "host" which is already defined on the MySQL type?
> ----
> Need prose and/or examples to discuss if these are errors or are side effects created (such as "choice" of "host".  
> ----
> In relation to this last thought, another bug will be opened in JIRA to ask this question. 



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