deltacloud-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "marios@redhat.com" <mandr...@redhat.com>
Subject Re: CIMI test plan - resource metadata
Date Fri, 04 Jan 2013 09:52:05 GMT
On 04/01/13 01:28, rlandy@redhat.com wrote:
> First draft of the Resource Metadata Test Plan (including xsl file)
>  - Machine capabilities: DefaultInitialState and InitialStates
> 

TL;DR: I think I'll go ahead and push this and you can tweak/fix the
following points as you see fit


Hi Ronelle:

this is looking very good indeed. Couple minor comments/points of
clarification:

* Part1 => 1.2 => Success Criteria : "For each collection appearing in
the CEP there should be a ResourceMetadata entry with the corresponding
typeURI in the ResourceMetadata collection "

=====I'm not sure if this is true; it is my understanding that there
will be entries in the Resource Metadata Collection for those Resources
that the Provider wishes to advertise some feature/capability/action.
Did you find something in the spec to the contrary which I (very well)
may have missed?



* Part 2 "This test only applies if CEP.machines is present"

======I think this should be "only applies if CEP.ResourceMetadata
collection contains an entry corresponding to the Machine resource"
(follows from my first point above)



* Parts 3/4 - need a "only applies if the ResourceMetadata resource
corresponding to the Machine resource contains a _name_ capability"
(i.e. _name_  is [DefaultInitialState | InitialStates] )



* This one is a bit nick-pickingy - just a thought: Part2 => 2.1 =>
Success Criteria: "Capabilities, attributes and actions available on the
provider that are associated with the Machine collection must be listed"

=====I think we might tweak the wording a bit here; something like "at
least one of capabilities/attributes/actions must be listed within the
Machine Resource Metadata resource". For two reasons: first to clarify
that a RM resource doesn't have to have all three (I know this isn't
what you meant, but it might be read that way), and explicate that if
there is a RM resource for a collection FOO, it must advertise at least
*something* there (i.e. feature and capabilities and actions are ALL
optional; but at least one of them should be listed otherwise there's a
problem with that RM resource). Secondly, since this is 'success
criteria' it must be verifiable; "available on the provider" - how are
we going to verify that? I mean, you get a list of RM capabilities, how
do you know it includes all those that are 'available'.


marios


Mime
View raw message