[SAGA-RG] Service Discovery spec updated at last ...

[Andre Merzky]

Quoting [Sylvain Reynaud] (Dec 17 2008):
> 
> Hi Steve and Andre,
> 
> I am the reviewer who criticised having different "service type names" 
> for file and for directory (and also for logical file/logical directory).
> 
> I agree with Andre's suggestion of limiting this to dir (and also to 
> logical dir I guess ?),

Yes, right, same here, and for all other namespace based
services in any extensions I guess.

Best, Andre.


> because users use discovery services to discover 
> the base directory they can access, while they use logical file catalogs 
> to find files. Moreover, dir can be seen as a kind of implicit service 
> with its open() and openDir() methods.
> 
> Regards,
> Sylvain
> 
> 
> Andre Merzky a écrit :
> >[...]
> >>I don't agree with this - it used to be your way round and it was
> >>criticised by one of our reviewers. You don't generally want to access
> >>directories and files by different services unless the underlying
> >>system used a  universal naming schema such as AFS.   However,
> >>checking the main spec again, I see you have no way of controlling
> >>which file/directory service you use - it is under the control of the
> >>implementation.
> >>    
> >
> >Well, the service is (explicitely or implicitely) specified
> >by the URL you use to open the file/dir instance, like
> >'ftp://ftp.redhat.com/' points to a very specific ftp
> >server/service.
> >
> >
> >  
> >>So at least file, directory, logical-file and
> >>logical-directory should be removed from this table until
> >>such time as they provide a means of selecting the service
> >>to use.
> >>    
> >
> >Would it be ok for you if we remove 'file' then, and limit
> >to 'dir'?  Usually, one would like to discover services for
> >whole file systems, not for individual files, I presume?
> >
> >[...]
> 



-- 
Nothing is ever easy.