[glue-wg] New types

[Florido Paganelli]

On 2013-07-22 19:15, stephen.burke at stfc.ac.uk wrote:>> Usually I would
say not - we have the InterfaceVersion for that. For
>> example SRM v1 and v2 are incompatible, but both have a Name of SRM. I
>> think they should only have different names if they're really
>> fundamentally different.
>
> Also, think about future compatibility as well as the past - even if
gram 5 is totally different to any previous gram, could there be a gram
6 which is backward-compatible? If so you'd have to keep calling it
gram5 which wouldn't be very elegant ...
>
> Stephen
>

I think is no point to force compatibility concepts in the schema. This
will always be questionable. If we wanted to do that, there should have
been dedicated fields representing compatibility.

I think we should foster simplicity and intuition.

If 5 is software/protocol/package version, it SHOULD NOT be in the
InterfaceName, in my opinion.

Cheers,
Florido
-- 
==================================================
 Florido Paganelli
   ARC Middleware Developer - EMI Project
   System Administrator
 Lund University
 Department of Physics
 Division of Particle Physics
 BOX118
 221 00 Lund
 Office Tel: 046-2220272
 Email: florido.paganelli at REMOVE_THIShep.lu.se
 Homepage: http://www.hep.lu.se/staff/paganelli
==================================================