Seems rather ugly. Do you have an opinion? If I specify that I'm using the Standard interface, what point is there in the "type" field?
On Tue, Nov 28, 2017 at 10:27 AM, Tal Liron <[email protected]> wrote: > I mentioned this to you in the previous thread: the "type" field is > required for interface definitions according to TOSCA syntax. So, even if > it's the same as what you are inheriting, you must specify it. > > On Tue, Nov 28, 2017 at 12:04 PM, DeWayne Filppi <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > Now that the 'subclassing' problem has been resolved, overriding > interface > > methods is breaking. Simple example: > > > > tosca_definitions_version: tosca_simple_yaml_1_0 > > > > imports: > > > > - aria-1.0 > > > > node_types: > > > > T1: > > derived_from: tosca.nodes.Root > > interfaces: > > Standard: > > create: > > implementation: > > primary: i1.sh > > delete: > > implementation: > > primary: i1.sh > > > > The error, using Aria in the ARIA-1 branch: > > > > Validation issues: > > 2: required field "type" in > > "aria_extension_tosca.simple_v1_0.definitions.InterfaceDefinition" does > > not > > have a value > > >
