Re: [tosca] RE: updated operational model

[Tal Liron <tliron@redhat.com>]

On Tue, Feb 15, 2022 at 11:57 AM Chris Lauwers <lauwers@ubicity.com> wrote:

• There must not be any ambiguity about how a TOSCA representation graph is expected to be created from TOSCA service templates. This part should not be âopen for interpretationâ.

I agree that it should not be ambiguous, but it should also not overreach. The key is that it should be "just enough" for the TOSCA language to make sense.

Â

• TOSCA workflows, interfaces, operations, and notifications are only relevant in the context of âpure TOSCA orchestrationâ.

I'm not sure why you would say that. Many orchestrators and platforms have equivalents of these, which could be expressed in TOSCA. Examples from my work:

• Turandot, which is not a "pure TOSCA orchestrator", supports operations of various types on pods (using the K8s control plane) and KubeVirt virtual machines (using ssh)
  
• Puccini, which is not an orchestrator at all, can export TOSCA 1.3 workflows to BPMN2, to be used by a wide variety of orchestrators