Hi, Now that I have the basic policy model in place I am trying to link up this with the assembly model now.
The policy intents and policy sets applicable for a domain are defined in the definitions.xml. There is a SCADefinitions processor that deals with reading and resolving the intents and policysets in the definitions.xml. The SCADefinitions processor has a model resolver into which the the various policy intents and policy sets that are read get added. All of this is a part of the policy-xml module. Now looking into the aspect of dealing with the 'attachments' of policy intents and policy sets into various SCA constructs, I see there is a need to resolve the intents and policysets with those that have been read from the definitions.xml. This means an artifact processor such as the CompositeProcessor needs to be passed a resolver that has the various policy intents and policy sets in it. Now the question is, do we assume that we use the same resolver that is used to add up the read sca contructs is used to also add the policy intents and policysets ? or... Going by the discussion in http://www.mail-archive.com/tuscany-dev@ws.apache.org/msg19069.html, I am given to understand that its best to keep all of the things related to policies - the processor, the resolver etc. separate from those that we have for the assembly model. If this is the case then the CompositeProcessor, the ConstrainingType Processor etc. all have to be set with the instance of a SCADefinitionsResolver that will be used to resolve to policy related things. Could somebody please help me with some perspectives on which one of the above two is better to follow? Thanks - Venkat --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
