That looks good to me! Any thoughts from other committers? On Fri, Oct 20, 2017 at 4:37 AM, D Jayachandran <d.jayachand...@ericsson.com > wrote:
> Hi Tal, > > We have started to work on the plugin import part. Just to re-confirm we > would going with the below convention and contributing it back to ARIA. > Please let me know if you have any comments. > > imports: > - file: <plugin-name>-<version> > repository: plugins > - file: <plugin-name>-<version> > repository: plugins > > Example: > > imports: > - file: openstack-1.0 > repository: plugins > - file: kubernetes-1.0 > repository: plugins > > NOTE: We are not looking at having the extension ".yaml" mandated. > > Regards, > DJ > -----Original Message----- > From: Tal Liron [mailto:t...@cloudify.co] > Sent: Tuesday, September 26, 2017 11:56 AM > To: dev@ariatosca.incubator.apache.org > Subject: Re: Contribution for https://issues.apache.org/ > jira/browse/ARIA-118 > > That's how ARIA implements it right now. I consider the TOSCA 1.0 spec on > "imports" to be an error because it contradicts the rest of the document, > so we have always used the correction as it now appears in 1.2. This is not > the only place where we had to resolve contradictions, by any means. :) > > I'm getting very close to finishing work the complete parser test suite, > so it will give us a good centralized place to check and confirm grammar. > > By the way, take care to mention TOSCA specifically when you refer to > versions. "YAML 1.1" refers to the YAML spec. (We actually use YAML 1.2.) > > > On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 1:06 AM, D Jayachandran < > d.jayachand...@ericsson.com > > wrote: > > > Hi Tal, > > > > Are we looking at the below syntax for plugins, with the changes in > > YAML > > 1.1 > > > > Imports: > > - file: openstack-1.0 > > repository: plugins > > - file: kubernetes-1.0 > > repository: plugins > > > > Regards, > > DJ > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Steve Baillargeon [mailto:steve.baillarg...@ericsson.com] > > Sent: Monday, September 25, 2017 11:24 PM > > To: dev@ariatosca.incubator.apache.org > > Subject: RE: Contribution for https://issues.apache.org/ > > jira/browse/ARIA-118 > > > > Hi > > YAML1.0 spec is incorrect for import definitions. > > YAML1.2 spec has updated the import grammar as follows. > > It will be great for ARIA to support parts of the YAML1.2 spec soon > > especially for areas that are corrected. > > > > From YAML 1.2 spec: > > 3.5.8.2 Grammar > > Import definitions have one the following grammars: > > 3.5.8.2.1 Single-line grammar: > > imports: > > - <file_URI_1> > > - <file_URI_2> > > 3.5.8.2.2 Multi-line grammar > > imports: > > - file: <file_URI> > > repository: <repository_name> > > namespace_uri: <definition_namespace_uri> > > namespace_prefix: <definition_namespace_prefix> > > > > -Steve B > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Tal Liron [mailto:t...@cloudify.co] > > Sent: Monday, September 25, 2017 11:39 AM > > To: dev@ariatosca.incubator.apache.org > > Subject: Re: Contribution for https://issues.apache.org/ > > jira/browse/ARIA-118 > > > > So, this is one of the cases where the spec seems to be wrong: the > > <import_name> is probably a mistake. None of the other examples in the > > spec have it, nor do we see it in other TOSCA examples. > > > > Note that if we needed an <import_name> than it would even have to be > > for the short form. So: > > > > imports: > > - importname1: myfile.yaml > > - importname2: otherfile.yaml > > - importname3: > > file: lastfile.yaml > > > > The above seems wrong (also, what role does the import name have?). In > > ARIA we treated this as an error in the spec, so we do not have the > > import name. > > > > On Mon, Sep 25, 2017 at 8:52 AM, D Jayachandran < > > d.jayachand...@ericsson.com > > > wrote: > > > > > Hi Tal, > > > > > > As per the grammer in the SPEC, seems the import should take a > > > <import_name>. Your example dint have a <import_name> but started > > > with respository as such. > > > > > > <import_name>: > > > > > > file: <file_URI> > > > > > > repository: <repository_name> > > > > > > namespace_uri: <definition_namespace_uri> > > > > > > namespace_prefix: <definition_namespace_prefix> > > > > > > > > > With your example can we have multiple repositories ? > > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > DJ > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Tal Liron [mailto:t...@cloudify.co] > > > Sent: Thursday, September 21, 2017 9:31 PM > > > To: dev@ariatosca.incubator.apache.org > > > Subject: Re: Contribution for https://issues.apache.org/ > > > jira/browse/ARIA-118 > > > > > > I do suggest the repository, because it seems like the more TOSCA > > > way to do this. These are special imports that are not part of the > > > CSAR but rather provided in a special way by ARIA. A special > > > repository seems to be the right way to handle this. > > > > > > On Thu, Sep 21, 2017 at 2:40 AM, D Jayachandran < > > > d.jayachand...@ericsson.com > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > Hi Tal, > > > > > > > > I had a space between the plugin and filename. The correct one > > > > would like this. > > > > > > > > import > > > > - plugin:openstack-1.0 > > > > > > > > By this way it won't conflict with YAML convention. Do you still > > > > suggest to use the repository conventions ? > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > DJ > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > From: Tal Liron [mailto:t...@cloudify.co] > > > > Sent: Wednesday, September 20, 2017 9:38 PM > > > > To: dev@ariatosca.incubator.apache.org > > > > Subject: Re: Contribution for https://issues.apache.org/ > > > > jira/browse/ARIA-118 > > > > > > > > I think the format you suggest is awkward in YAML. Because ":" is > > > > reserved, you would have to wrap the string in quotes: > > > > > > > > imports: > > > > - this/is/a/string/import.yaml > > > > - this is also a string .yaml > > > > - "plugins: but here we have to add quotes because of the > colon.yaml" > > > > > > > > The TOSCA way to handle name ambiguity is to use a repository in > > > > the long-form of the import. What we can do is create a built-in > > > > repository called "plugins". So it would look like this: > > > > > > > > imports: > > > > - mytypes.yaml > > > > - repository: plugins > > > > file: openstack.yaml > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 3:49 AM, D Jayachandran < > > > > d.jayachand...@ericsson.com > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > Hi Tal, > > > > > > > > > > With respect to this JIRA issue. > > > > > I would like to contribute on the first part, which is specific > > > > > to plugin implementation. > > > > > > > > > > " If a plugin contained its plugin.yaml as part of its wagon > > > > > archive, then once installed, users could import the yaml file > > > > > more easily using a notation such as plugins/openstack.yaml (or > > > > > perhaps openstack.yaml, having the import mechanism iterate over > > > > > plugins looking for this resource file or so)" > > > > > > > > > > Instead of "plugins/openstack.yaml", I would like to suggest the > > > > > following > > > > > "plugins: openstack-<version>" > > > > > Please let me know if this fine with you. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > DJ > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > From: Tal Liron [mailto:t...@gigaspaces.com] > > > > > Sent: Thursday, July 20, 2017 6:24 PM > > > > > To: dev@ariatosca.incubator.apache.org > > > > > Subject: Re: Contribution for https://issues.apache.org/ > > > > > jira/browse/ARIA-118 > > > > > > > > > > It's unassigned, so I don't see why not! > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Jul 20, 2017 at 7:41 AM, D Jayachandran < > > > > > d.jayachand...@ericsson.com > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > > > > > Do you have any plans on working on this JIRA issue ? > > > > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ARIA-118 > > > > > > Can we contribute on this ? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > DJ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
