[cddlm] phone conference notes, may 25 2005

[Ayla Debora Dantas de Souza - Projeto Ourgrid]

Hi,

sorry, maybe it is too late to give some comments, but maybe they could 
be useful and could help to clarify some points in the document, even 
for other versions. I would like to say that these comments are based on 
the view point of someone new in the group.
   * I think  the text should more clearly define the role of the 
deployment API, or may be more homogeneous. Sometimes it is said to 
deploy "jobs" (as in the introduction) and sometimes 
"applications"(section 2.1). In section 2.1( wrongly numbered as 1.1.1), 
it's role is just to deploy applications to one or more target 
computers. In Introduction, it is said to enable programs to submit jobs 
into the system for deployment, terminating existing jobs, and probing 
the state of the system. The term "such tasks" that is used in the 
second paragraph of section 2.1 is too general, because in the previous 
paragraph, these tasks are not clear. In the same paragraph, the term 
"this service" refers to the service provided by the API? Maybe this 
sentence should be rewritten.
   * Maybe it would be better to remove the title "1.1.1 
ConfigurationDescription Language", or it should be included a title for 
the 3 points described in the section referring to each document.
   * Section 2.2 - will the document be updated to refer to new drafts 
of some documents , such as in the WSRF-RP and WSRF-RL or 
implementations should consider old drafts? Maybe there are not so many 
differences.
   * Last paragraph of section 2.2: "the referenced to...": I think the 
verb is missing.
   * In section 3.1, it would be good to put a reference to the document 
that should indicate what you consider an OGSA-compliant Grid Fabric. Is 
it based on the first version or the 
"draft-ggf-ogsa-wsrf-basic-profile.doc" document?
   * The term "cluster" in section 3.1 is used to refer to any set of 
machines or to the cluster definition used for High Performance 
Computing? If you refer to the first case, wouldn't it be better to 
remove the term cluster?
   * Second paragraph of section 4.1: "...deploy to one or more..." 
instead of "..deploy to ore more...." At the end of this paragraph, it 
is said that the process for obtaining a Portal EPR is not in the scope 
of the document. Does this mean that the EPR can obtained in any way or 
that there is another document specifying that?
   * Section 4.2, 5th paragraph, first sentence: The configuration of 
the component properties may be made before an "initialize" call on a 
component or configurations may be done just during initialization?
   * Section 4.4 - Subsection numbers are wrong, as previously noted. In 
section 4.4.1 (that is now 3.1.1), I think a ".." is missing between "0" 
and "9" when specifying the characters range.
   * Section 3.1.2 that should be 4.4.2: replace "provide" by "provided"
   * Section 4.5: replace "exports" by "export".

Best regards and thanks in advance,
  Ayla




Steve Loughran wrote:

> Summary
>
> Discussion of the deployment API. The doc is going to be updated with 
> feedback from the group and
> Bryan Murray; a new version will come out friday afternoon. This will 
> be the last call document;
> Steve is away the following week.
>
> For a friday release, all comments must be in by friday am 0900 UTC.
>
> There may or may not be a phone call next week.
>
> -------------------------------
>
> Dejan
>
> -structure.
>  consolidate fault tolerance
>  consolidate architecutre
>
> -section numbering broken (word problems)
>
> s2.1.1 should be broken into language and s.2.1.2 comp model.
>
> Cover materials
>  -needs to put stuff in context with the other specifications. This 
> should go on the front page.
>  -relationship to other working groups. JSDL, ACS, DRAMAA
>
> security: should vs must in recommendations about filesystem and 
> visibility
>
> References
>  -add Jun as author of XML CDL
>  -dejan has verified that references appear in doc; all looks good.
>
>
> stuart email comment:
>  -put sequence diagram example at back.
>
> (dejan: how are (relatively high level) use cases realized?
> steve: sequence diagrams show how
>
> stuart email comment:
>  -consistency with pictures vs schema fragments.
>
> dejan: Pictures are good - how about both?
>
> steve: its hard work keeping everything consistent. The XSD will go in 
> an appendix.
>
>
> Jun
>
> -put XSD at end.
>
> -s5.3 use prefix api for typing in XML namespace.
>
> -will have lots of feedback at implementation time.
>
> steve: we can spend some time talking about testing @GGF.
>
> Kojo
> -feedback by friday morning UTC.
>