Frank Ludolph wrote: > Ethan Quach wrote: >> >> >> Frank Ludolph wrote: >>> Jack Schwartz wrote: >>>> On 06/08/09 14:37, Frank Ludolph wrote: >>>>> Jack Schwartz wrote: >>>>>> HI Sue and Frank. >>>>>> >>>>>> Susan Sohn wrote: >>>>>>> On 06/05/09 11:40, Jack Schwartz wrote: >>>>>>>> Hi Sue. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On 06/05/09 09:07, Susan Sohn wrote: >>>>>>>>> Jack, >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On 06/03/09 18:13, Jack Schwartz wrote: >>>>>>>>>> Hi everyone. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> I have updated the Manifest Inter-File Organization >>>>>>>>>> Functional Specification per yesterday's meeting discussion. >>>>>>>>>> Changes deal with how default sysmap manifests are >>>>>>>>>> defined/handled. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Link is here: >>>>>>>>>> http://www.opensolaris.org/os/project/caiman/XML_Parsing/xml_2_func_spec.4.pdf >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> With regard to default sysmap manifests, it now states the >>>>>>>>>> following: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> - - - >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> A service setup command designates one sysmap manifest to be >>>>>>>>>> a service's default sysmap manifest. A default sysmap >>>>>>>>>> manifest will ?match? all systems for which no Sysmap >>>>>>>>>> Manifest with explicit matching criteria exist, so a default >>>>>>>>>> sysmap manifest does not need to have criteria. Any criteria >>>>>>>>>> in a default sysmap manifest will be ignored. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> A (non-default) sysmap manifest must have criteria to be >>>>>>>>>> useful. Non-default sysmap manifests without criteria will be >>>>>>>>>> ignored. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Why not just say that the default sysmap manifests will not >>>>>>>>> have criteria? That way, the user could replace the default >>>>>>>>> manifest by simply adding one without criteria and we wouldn't >>>>>>>>> need a special command. It also seems less ambiguous as the >>>>>>>>> distinction between a default and non-default sysmap manifest >>>>>>>>> would be more apparent. >>>>>>>> We discussed this at the Tuesday meeting. Originally, what you >>>>>>>> are suggesting is what I wanted: to have a clear distinction >>>>>>>> between default and non-default manifests. (I wanted to >>>>>>>> enforce this by schema.) But then I thought we all agreed that >>>>>>>> it would be simpler and more straightforward to designate any >>>>>>>> manifest (with or without criteria) as a default manifest. One >>>>>>>> can easily swap a manifest in and out as the default >>>>>>>> temporarily without having to edit or re-edit the manifest, >>>>>>>> change the service, or do anything painful. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I can see advantages to both sides. It just seems to me like it >>>>>>> might be confusing for users to have the same manifest cause >>>>>>> different behavior, depending on how it is used. I'd suggest >>>>>>> that you ask for Frank's input on this one. >>>>>> As Ethan also pointed out, defining a default sysmap manifest as >>>>>> one without criteria means there can be only one file without >>>>>> criteria. How would we handle the case where someone plops a >>>>>> second criteria-less sysmap manifest onto the system? We would >>>>>> still need a way of saying one of those two files is the default >>>>>> manifest, so a command would still be needed. Alternatively, the >>>>>> default would be given a certain name, and a second file would >>>>>> overwrite the first; suppose the first file is desired again. >>>>>> It still sounds to me like having the ability to install any >>>>>> sysmap manifest (with or without criteria) as a default is >>>>>> preferred. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> Note that if you have two criteria-less sysmap manifests, the one >>>>> designated as default will never be selected because all >>>>> non-default manifests are evaluated first and one with no criteria >>>>> will always be selected before taking the default. >>>>> >>>>> As a rule it would seem that only one criteria-less manifest can >>>>> be active at a time and that it must be the default. If a >>>>> criteria-less manifest is the default and another manifest is made >>>>> the default the original criteria-less default manifest would have >>>>> to be deactivated. >>>> Yes, a single manifest would be installed as the default. When >>>> that manifest is installed, the previous one would be de-installed. >>>> >>> I didn't phrase it well. The point is that there shouldn't be an >>> active criteria-less manifest that isn't also the default, otherwise >>> it will be the defacto default. >> >> That really depends. If we're choosing to say that "criteria-less" >> does not mean "default", then the algorithm to choose which one >> the default is obviously won't even be looking at criteria; it'd just >> be looking for the one marked default. >> >> > No, default is what is selected when everything else has been tried > and failed. If there is a criteria-less manifest that is not the > default, it will always be selected before the default.
Why would it always be selected before the one marked default? Who, in your perspective, is doing the selecting here? -ethan > > Frank >>>>> >>>>>>>>>> - - - >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Here's how I see that this will affect at least the AI >>>>>>>>>> services and webserver teams: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> 1) Need a command or way of selecting a new default sysmap >>>>>>>>>> manifest. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> 2) Define that if there is only one sysmap manifest specified >>>>>>>>>> for a service, it is the default. >>>>>>>>>> 3) Define how the default file is provided (e.g. by the user, >>>>>>>>>> template, ???). If a template is not provided as part of AI, >>>>>>>>>> need to insure that a default sysmap manifest is provided by >>>>>>>>>> the user when the AI setup command is invoked. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> 4) Define warning message behavior (if any) if a sysmap >>>>>>>>>> manifest with criteria is specified as a default. (Maybe no >>>>>>>>>> message?) >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> 5) Define what to do with the old default sysmap manifest, if >>>>>>>>>> a new sysmap manifest is installed as the default sysmap >>>>>>>>>> manifest. (Keep it around, trash it, ??? I suggest keeping >>>>>>>>>> it in case the user has modified it or created it.) >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> 6) Define warning message behavior (if any) if a >>>>>>>>>> previously-default sysmap manifest with no criteria is now no >>>>>>>>>> longer a default. (I suggest no message.) >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> 7) I don't suggest an explicit command for uninstalling a >>>>>>>>>> default sysmap manifest per se. Instead, I suggest that we >>>>>>>>>> impose that there will always be a default, by implicitly >>>>>>>>>> uninstalling the old default when installing a new one. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> 8) Need a way of listing all sysmap manifests, including the >>>>>>>>>> current default. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Comments? >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>>>>> Jack >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> caiman-discuss mailing list >>> caiman-discuss at opensolaris.org >>> http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/caiman-discuss >
