This is good:
- It looks like we have a common understanding of (and agreement on) the requirements
- We generally seem to agree on a proposed solution (signaling to the parser/orchestrator that two or more types are âthe sameâ or âequivalentâ).
If thatâs correct, then what remains is to discuss pros and cons of the various syntax proposals. Letâs try to get this finalized next Tuesday.
Thanks for the very productive email exchanges.
Chris
From: Tal Liron <tliron@redhat.com>
Sent: Wednesday, October 7, 2020 10:35 AM
To: Chris Lauwers <lauwers@ubicity.com>
Cc: Calin Curescu <calin.curescu@ericsson.com>; tosca@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: Re: [tosca] sharing types between profiles
If you put your âtype_aliasesâ in org.profile.v3, then your solution is exactly what weâre proposing, albeit with less elegant syntax
😊
You're right! I am suggesting this as a compromise. The difference in my proposal is that:
-
This does not have to be the responsibility of the profile provider. (As I said, I think it should be with the service template author.) But, the provider could do it, too. Or an integrator (whoever creates the "platform profile").
-
This proposal does not introduce any new reference concept of aliases or canonical names. It works entirely within the existing namespaces and imports. Generally I think my proposal does not rock the boat by changing core concepts in TOSCA and it could really
work quite seamlessly as a rather transparent add-on.