stratos-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Nirmal Fernando <nirmal070...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Partition definition should just have set of properties (1..n)
Date Thu, 21 Nov 2013 13:54:23 GMT
Hi Imesh,


On Thu, Nov 21, 2013 at 6:46 PM, Imesh Gunaratne <imesh@apache.org> wrote:

> I think what was meant by scope is the same:
>
> <partition>
>
>       <id>P1</id>
>
>       <scope>PROVIDER</scope>
>
>      <property name="provider" value="ec2"/>
>
> <property name="region" value="us-east-1" />
> </partition>
>

Part that I don't understand is the rationale behind scope. If I take the
sample you've given, it says scope is 'Provider', what does it means here?
What if I provide scope as 'Region' here? What is the difference to the
final outcome?

>
> However I think your suggestion looks much cleaner +1
>
>
Great.

> Thanks
>
>
>
> On Wed, Nov 20, 2013 at 9:37 PM, Nirmal Fernando <nirmal070125@gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> All,
>>
>> IMO $Subject. It's not correct to have a scope. In my view expectation of
>> a Partition can be "I want my instances in *EC2* IaaS and in *us-east-1*region".
>>
>> <partition id="p1">
>>      <property name="PROVIDER" value="ec2"/>
>>      <property name="REGION" value="us-east-1"/>
>> ....
>> </partition>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Best Regards,
>> Nirmal
>>
>> Nirmal Fernando.
>> PPMC Member & Committer of Apache Stratos,
>> Senior Software Engineer, WSO2 Inc.
>>
>> Blog: http://nirmalfdo.blogspot.com/
>>
>
>


-- 
Best Regards,
Nirmal

Nirmal Fernando.
PPMC Member & Committer of Apache Stratos,
Senior Software Engineer, WSO2 Inc.

Blog: http://nirmalfdo.blogspot.com/

Mime
View raw message