Ok Tal, I agree with having a property datatype as version and using them in my implementations. But to re-iterate I see the support for version metadata for different types ( node, artifact, attribute, capability, requirements ) in TOSCA 1.0 profile too. You can check the section starting from "3.6.3 Artifact Type".
Example from SPEC: 3.6.8.2 Grammar Node Types have following grammar : < node_type_name >: derived_from: < parent_node_type_name > version: < version_number > description: < node_type_description > properties: < property_definitions > attributes: < attribute_definitions > requirements: - < requirement_definitions > capabilities: < capability_definitions > interfaces: < interface_definitions > artifacts: < artifact_definitions > Even am trying to understand the use-case which can be mapped to version support with each of types. Is it like we can have same custom node types with different version in my service template ? In that case how can the node template choose a particular version of the custom node type ? Or Is the version only for the template author to track changes about custom types over time ? Regards, DJ -----Original Message----- From: Tal Liron [mailto:t...@cloudify.co] Sent: Tuesday, August 08, 2017 12:11 PM To: dev@ariatosca.incubator.apache.org Subject: Re: Version support for different TOSCA types There is no special use of versions in TOSCA 1.0: it is up to you to define properties or attributes or inputs of the "version" data type and do with those as you please in your operation implementations. TOSCA 1.1 takes it a step further and provides standardized metadata to nodes. It seems that you have a particular use case in mind. Can you elaborate it to us? Perhaps we can together brainstorm a solution, On Tue, Aug 8, 2017 at 1:05 AM, D Jayachandran <d.jayachand...@ericsson.com> wrote: > Hi Tal, > > I agree version is now looked upon as a "data type" now. But does the > orchestrator has any scope when it comes to comparing node types or > templates depending on the version specified ? > Am more interested in this statement where the version is looked upon > as a parameter when defining different types "TOSCA supports the > concept of “reuse” of type definitions, as well as template > definitions which could be version and change over time. " > > > Regards, > DJ > -----Original Message----- > From: Tal Liron [mailto:t...@cloudify.co] > Sent: Monday, August 07, 2017 9:04 PM > To: dev@ariatosca.incubator.apache.org > Subject: Re: Version support for different TOSCA types > > OK, you are referring to the "version" data type, and it is fully > supported in ARIA, which includes: > > 1. Strict adherence to the (rather odd) specification and its regex 2. > Proper support for TOSCA comparative constraints for versions > (greater_than, lesser_than, etc.) 3. Comparisons also work properly in > Python when comparing version instances > > On Mon, Aug 7, 2017 at 12:22 AM, D Jayachandran < > d.jayachand...@ericsson.com > > wrote: > > > Hi Tal, > > > > I was referring to the section 3.2.2 in TOSCA 1.0. It seems the > > version is part of both TOSCA 1.0 and TOSCA 1.1 > > > > http://docs.oasis-open.org/tosca/TOSCA-Simple-Profile- > > YAML/v1.0/os/TOSCA-Simple-Profile-YAML-v1.0-os.pdf > > > > Regards, > > DJ > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Tal Liron [mailto:t...@cloudify.co] > > Sent: Friday, August 04, 2017 9:39 PM > > To: dev@ariatosca.incubator.apache.org > > Subject: Re: Version support for different TOSCA types > > > > I think you are referring to TOSCA 1.1, which is on the roadmap but > > not supported yet. > > > > You can of course create your own "version" property or attribute > > for node types in TOSCA 1.0. > > > > On Fri, Aug 4, 2017 at 7:05 AM, D Jayachandran < > > d.jayachand...@ericsson.com> > > wrote: > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > The TOSCA spec mentions about the version as a keyname for > > > different type definitions(Node, Group, Interface, Artifacts, Data > > > .. .) As mentioned in spec this is for the re-use of different > > > types . Does ARIA support the version at this stage ? What is the > > > scope of orchestrator when it comes to the version support ? > > > > > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > DJ > > > > > >