[SAGA-RG] SD Agreement

[Andre Merzky]

Sounds good to me!

As for the overload: IMHO it should be ok to describe one
call, and to state that a missing VO filter indicates that
VO filtering is perfomed on the VOs of the contexts in the
active session.

Cheers, Andre.


Quoting [Fisher, SM (Steve)] (Mar 03 2008):
> Subject: SD Agreement
> From: "Fisher, SM (Steve)" <S.M.Fisher at rl.ac.uk>
> To: Andre Merzky <andre at merzky.net>, paventhan at rl.ac.uk
> Cc: saga-rg at ggf.org
> 
> Hi,
> 
> I just want to confirm what was agreed in Boston:
> 
> The list_services method will be overloaded. To make this look sensible
> the vo_filter will be moved to the end so we will have:
> 
> list_services(service_filter, data_filter, vo_filter)
> 
> and
> 
> list_services(service_filter, data_filter)
> 
> Where in the latter case the set of Vos is derived from the context.
> 
> How do I describe this in the spec - do I describe them as two separate
> methods that just happen to have the same name or as one method with an
> optional parameter?
> 
> SAGA Service types are reverse DNS style. 
> A list of the service types for the services in GFD.90 will appear in
> the SD specification. 
> Other services in subsidiary packages will define their own service
> types taking care to avoid any clashes.
> 
> If you agree I can now get this thing finished off very soon - this week
> perhaps!
> 
> Steve



-- 
"We've got too much time to waste to stand around here doing things."
                                                             - Tigger