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 <> 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:
> For additional commands, e-mail: >
