One thing I believe this scenario does not take into account is when the automation tool is a server/client implementation, it is assuming that the automation server does not do any of the work and relies on standalone automation tools to perform work.
I'm not sure this should be a part of the core scenarios for the first version of the specification - this was discussed and debated in the past but it was decided that the OSLC specification should not force a pattern here either push or pull or define how the agent/agentless systems/endpoints communicate with the server. Regards, David ____________________________________________________ David Brauneis STSM, Rational Software Delivery Automation Chief Architect (RAF) email: [email protected] | phone: 720-395-5659 | mobile: 919-656-0874 From: Michael F Fiedler/Durham/IBM@IBMUS To: [email protected] Date: 10/12/2011 12:44 PM Subject: [Oslc-Automation] Scenario for automation server/automation tool (worker, agent, etc) interaction Sent by: [email protected] As discussed at the end of the last workgroup meeting, Pramod Chandoria has provided a proposed scenario [1] for how automation providers or servers interact with automation tools/agents/workers. It raises interesting points on how the instances performing the actual automation work/execution find their providers and how they receive their work (push/pull). We'll discuss the scenario in the next workgroup meeting, but any discussion before then can take place on the list. Examples of other interactions with automation providers would be of interest. [1] - http://open-services.net/bin/view/Main/AutomationScenarios#AutomationTools Regards, Mike Michael Fiedler IBM Rational Software [email protected] 919-254-4170 _______________________________________________ Oslc-Automation mailing list [email protected] http://open-services.net/mailman/listinfo/oslc-automation_open-services.net
