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

[Andre Merzky]

Quoting [Steve Fisher] (Dec 17 2008):
> 
> 2008/12/17 Sylvain Reynaud <Sylvain.Reynaud at in2p3.fr>:
> > 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 ?), 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
> 
> Yes but I think it is more fundamentally a file service - the
> directory is just one way of organising a bunch of files. The package
> is also the file package rather than the directory package.

Sure, valid point of view, I agree.

But naming it 'dir' makes clear that the returned URL's are
usable to create a saga::file::directory instance - and that
is what this table is about, I though.  

Best, Andre.



> Steve
> 
> >
> >
> > 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.