[saga-rg] Jobs and SandBoxing

[Christopher Smith]

I misread .... I see ... users can just treat it as an opaque string
(doesn't mean it doesn't have structure).

-- Chris


On 25/8/05 09:58, "Christopher Smith" <csmith at platform.com> wrote:

> On 25/8/05 07:29, "Tom Goodale" <goodale at cct.lsu.edu> wrote:
> 
>> 
>> 
>> On Fri, 19 Aug 2005, Andre Merzky wrote:
>> 
>>>>> I am pretty sure it braks for some cases. E.g. the backend
>>>>> may have a moving URL, or may reuse ID's (as Unix does with
>>>>> pid's).  However, as long as it is not mandatory, it might
>>>>> just help...
>>>> 
>>>> You're right, but it would be useful for many cases.
>>> 
>>> So I guess we should include it, because it is simple, does
>>> not seem to break anything (its not mandatory, right?), and
>>> seems to allow a number of useful use cases.  As its not
>>> mandatory, we should add it to the notes section I guess.
>>> 
>>> Does anybody else on the list disagree?
>> 
>> I think it should be a hint for implementers, rather than required by the
>> spec, as as far as end users are concerned it should be an opaque string.
>> 
> The benefit of exposing the format of the string is that users can use the
> back end system identifier directly with the back end system commands and
> APIs if they so choose.
> 
> -- Chris
> 
>