Re: [tosca] operation implementations

On Wed, Mar 10, 2021 at 3:10 PM Chris Lauwers <lauwers@ubicity.com> wrote:

When defining operation implementations, TOSCA v1.3 makes a distinction between âprimaryâ and âdependentâ artifacts. Iâm not sure this distinction is useful. I propose that instead, we change operation implementations in v2.0 to take a list of artifacts, where each artifact in the list is processed sequentially.

This requires more discussion. I think we would want "implementation" to be more flexible then it is right now, so we can support REST calls and other custom operation types. The expectation that an operation's implementation would always be an artifact is limiting.

tosca message