[occi-wg] Templates (was Re: OCCI Dashboard)

[Sam Johnston]

On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 4:44 PM, <shlomo.swidler at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 5:34 PM, Sam Johnston<samj at samj.net> wrote:
> > On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 3:45 PM, <shlomo.swidler at gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> 4. How will I be able to discover VM images that are appropriate for
> >> my "compute"s? For example, Amazon has public AMIs that I can launch
> >> on my instances, and I can filter the ElasticFox view to only show me
> >> 64-bit AMIs or otherwise filter them by AMI name. Is this use case
> >> covered by OVF, or is it more appropriate at the OCCI level?
> >
> > This one I have a better answer for, in that there should be no "start"
> verb
> > for a template (e.g. AMI), rather only a "clone" verb which returns a
> > Location: to a new compute resource (pre-linked to any storage and
> network
> > resources as necessary). We could also bundle templates into a
> pre-defined
> > category, such that machines that are just not startable (e.g. due to
> > permissions, faults, etc.) don't appear as templates.
>
> Sounds strange to me.
>
> Sheep aSheep = new Sheep();
> Object dolly = aSheep.clone();
>
> I would expect "dolly" to be of type Sheep, the same type as the
> object that was cloned.
>

The original object was a compute resource and the result of "cloning" it is
a compute resource too - I don't see a problem here (though I agree with
your argument).


> Perhaps the verb "instantiate" is more appropriate to describe the act
> of "using a template". But it's harder to spell.


Perhaps, and you're right it is harder to spell. Whatever we choose we just
need to make sure we define it properly.

For performance reasons it might be useful to be able to "start" a template
anyway (one call instead of two)... in which case a pre-defined "template"
category makes sense.

Sam
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.ogf.org/pipermail/occi-wg/attachments/20090625/91a98902/attachment.html