RE: Implementation of Reserved Function Keywords ( SOURCE, TARGET ) and Artifact Function

[Vaishali Krishnamurthy]

Hi,
I am not able to find JIRA link to the artifact issue .
Could you please point to the JIRA for second issue ?

-Original Message-
From: Vaishali Krishnamurthy [mailto:v.krishnamurt...@globallogic.com]
Sent: Thursday, January 04, 2018 10:13 AM
To: 'dev@ariatosca.incubator.apache.org'
Subject: RE: Implementation of Reserved Function Keywords ( SOURCE, TARGET )
and Artifact Function

Thank you for the confirmation.

I will open a new JIRA ticket for the reserved function keywords issue and
contribute.
For artifact implementation I will use the existing JIRA for contribution.


-Original Message-
From: Tal Liron [mailto:t...@cloudify.co]
Sent: Wednesday, January 03, 2018 10:13 PM
To: dev@ariatosca.incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: Implementation of Reserved Function Keywords ( SOURCE, TARGET )
and Artifact Function

We indeed need a new bug opened for the first issue.

The second issue is part of the JIRA for artifact management, I believe.

On Wed, Jan 3, 2018 at 6:11 AM, Vaishali Krishnamurthy <
v.krishnamurt...@globallogic.com.invalid> wrote:

> Hi,
>
>
>
> When trying the attribute,  property and artifact functions in ARIA,
> we faced the following issues,
>
>
>
> 1.   I tried using the reserved function keywords like SOURCE and
> TARGET in the property and attribute functions. The keywords were not
> working when used inside relationship template with any functions at
> service-template level and threw error “InvalidValueError : function
> "get_property" refers to "SOURCE" but it is not contained in a
> relationship”. On further analysis, I found that the container_holder
> object to the method get_source() and get_target() was always a node
> /node template object rather than a relationship object.
>
>
>
> 2.   The Artifact function get_artifact() was not working, as the
> __evaluate__() of GetArtifact had no implementation.
>
>
>
> Could you please confirm if this is an issue so that I can raise a
> JIRA ticket and contribute for the same?
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Vaishali.
>

RE: Implementation of Reserved Function Keywords ( SOURCE, TARGET ) and Artifact Function

[Vaishali Krishnamurthy]

Thank you for the confirmation.

I will open a new JIRA ticket for the reserved function keywords issue and
contribute.
For artifact implementation I will use the existing JIRA for contribution.


-Original Message-
From: Tal Liron [mailto:t...@cloudify.co]
Sent: Wednesday, January 03, 2018 10:13 PM
To: dev@ariatosca.incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: Implementation of Reserved Function Keywords ( SOURCE, TARGET )
and Artifact Function

We indeed need a new bug opened for the first issue.

The second issue is part of the JIRA for artifact management, I believe.

On Wed, Jan 3, 2018 at 6:11 AM, Vaishali Krishnamurthy <
v.krishnamurt...@globallogic.com.invalid> wrote:

> Hi,
>
>
>
> When trying the attribute,  property and artifact functions in ARIA,
> we faced the following issues,
>
>
>
> 1.   I tried using the reserved function keywords like SOURCE and
> TARGET in the property and attribute functions. The keywords were not
> working when used inside relationship template with any functions at
> service-template level and threw error “InvalidValueError : function
> "get_property" refers to "SOURCE" but it is not contained in a
> relationship”. On further analysis, I found that the container_holder
> object to the method get_source() and get_target() was always a node
> /node template object rather than a relationship object.
>
>
>
> 2.   The Artifact function get_artifact() was not working, as the
> __evaluate__() of GetArtifact had no implementation.
>
>
>
> Could you please confirm if this is an issue so that I can raise a
> JIRA ticket and contribute for the same?
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Vaishali.
>

RE: Node Template Substitution

[D Jayachandran]

Hi,

Do you have information regarding this ? We are ready to contribute from our 
side.
We need to know the current state and the pending items to be implemented.

Regards,
DJ

-Original Message-
From: D Jayachandran [mailto:d.jayachand...@ericsson.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, December 13, 2017 11:48 AM
To: dev@ariatosca.incubator.apache.org
Subject: RE: Node Template Substitution

Hi Tal,

Could you point to the open items with respect to substitution mapping, so that 
we can see if we can contribute for those items.

Regards,
DJ

-Original Message-
From: Tal Liron [mailto:t...@cloudify.co]
Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2017 7:02 PM
To: dev@ariatosca.incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: Node Template Substitution

There is currently no clear timeline. I expect it would take several weeks, 
perhaps months, unless more contributors step up to assist the effort.

On Tue, Dec 12, 2017 at 5:00 AM, D Jayachandran  wrote:

> Hi,
>
> When can we expect the support for substitution mapping to be merged 
> to master branch ?
>
> Regards,
> DJ
> -Original Message-
> From: Steve Baillargeon [mailto:steve.baillarg...@ericsson.com]
> Sent: Friday, December 08, 2017 8:26 AM
> To: dev@ariatosca.incubator.apache.org
> Subject: RE: Node Template Substitution
>
> Hi Avia
> I don't access to the design doc. Am I missing something?
>
> Will 0.2.0 support YAML Profile 1.0 or 1.2 topology substitution?
> Or is it postponed to later?
>
> -Steve
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Avia Efrat [mailto:a...@cloudify.co]
> Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2017 4:44 AM
> To: dev@ariatosca.incubator.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Node Template Substitution
>
> There are plans to extend substitution mappings support to TOSCA 1.2, 
> just as any other change/improvement in the 1.2 profile.
>
> A CSAR with one 'main' service template and other service templates 
> will be stored as one service template, and will have one unique name.
>
> The design doc:
> https://drive.google.com/open?id=19nPjSj6mJyXWd4KLxPqRNp_
> TPqLpvXjzj98NXrAmcjc
>
>
> Additional v1.2 issues (a non-exhaustive list):
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/18yZC8qIWMbWBeULOzmLTT_
> oVrZXQ3z4030U6JIXdJ84/edit
>
>
> On Sat, Oct 14, 2017 at 2:10 AM, Steve Baillargeon < 
> steve.baillarg...@ericsson.com> wrote:
>
> > Hi Avia
> > One more question.
> >
> > Say we have a CSAR that contains multiple TOSCA YAML files e.g. a 
> > top-level ST and a bunch of low-level STs.
> > I am assuming all those TOSCA service templates (all of them have a 
> > full topology section) will be stored as a single “service-template”
> > in ARIA and a single unique name is needed to represent such single
> “service-template”
> > composed of multiple topologies.
> > Is this correct?
> >
> > -Steve
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Steve Baillargeon
> > Sent: Wednesday, October 11, 2017 11:29 AM
> > To: dev@ariatosca.incubator.apache.org
> > Subject: RE: Node Template Substitution
> >
> > Hi Avia
> > Is it possible to review the design documentation for it?
> > Do you have a doc or a few notes describing how ARIA will perform 
> > "best matching" based on YAML 1.0/1.1 profile?
> >
> > The full support for NFV Profile 1.0 requires Node Template 
> > Substitution defined in YAML 1.2 profile.
> > Any future plans for ARIA to extend Node Template Substitution as 
> > defined in YAML 1.2 profile ?
> >
> > Regards
> > Steve B
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Arthur Berezin [mailto:art...@cloudify.co]
> > Sent: Tuesday, October 10, 2017 12:20 PM
> > To: dev@ariatosca.incubator.apache.org
> > Subject: Re: Node Template Substitution
> >
> > Avia, can you please post a link to the design?  thanks
> >
> > On Mon, Oct 9, 2017 at 5:14 PM Avia Efrat  wrote:
> >
> > > Currently the design is finished, and it is on a small hold for now.
> > > The plan is to support the 1.0/1.1 profile.
> > >
> > > On Wed, Oct 4, 2017 at 7:50 PM, Steve Baillargeon < 
> > > steve.baillarg...@ericsson.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi
> > > > Can we have a status update on the availability of the Node 
> > > > Template Substitution feature (aka substitution mappings)?
> > > > Will it support the "capabilities" defined in YAML Profile 1.0 
> > > > or YAML Profile 1.2?
> > > >
> > > > Regards
> > > > Steve B
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Re: Implementation of Reserved Function Keywords ( SOURCE, TARGET ) and Artifact Function

[Tal Liron]

We indeed need a new bug opened for the first issue.

The second issue is part of the JIRA for artifact management, I believe.

On Wed, Jan 3, 2018 at 6:11 AM, Vaishali Krishnamurthy <
v.krishnamurt...@globallogic.com.invalid> wrote:

> Hi,
>
>
>
> When trying the attribute,  property and artifact functions in ARIA, we
> faced the following issues,
>
>
>
> 1.   I tried using the reserved function keywords like SOURCE and
> TARGET in the property and attribute functions. The keywords were not
> working when used inside relationship template with any functions at
> service-template level and threw error “InvalidValueError : function
> "get_property" refers to "SOURCE" but it is not contained in a
> relationship”. On further analysis, I found that the container_holder
> object to the method get_source() and get_target() was always a node /node
> template object rather than a relationship object.
>
>
>
> 2.   The Artifact function get_artifact() was not working, as the
> __evaluate__() of GetArtifact had no implementation.
>
>
>
> Could you please confirm if this is an issue so that I can raise a JIRA
> ticket and contribute for the same?
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Vaishali.
>

Implementation of Reserved Function Keywords ( SOURCE, TARGET ) and Artifact Function

[Vaishali Krishnamurthy]

Hi,



When trying the attribute,  property and artifact functions in ARIA, we
faced the following issues,



1.   I tried using the reserved function keywords like SOURCE and
TARGET in the property and attribute functions. The keywords were not
working when used inside relationship template with any functions at
service-template level and threw error “InvalidValueError : function
"get_property" refers to "SOURCE" but it is not contained in a
relationship”. On further analysis, I found that the container_holder
object to the method get_source() and get_target() was always a node /node
template object rather than a relationship object.



2.   The Artifact function get_artifact() was not working, as the
__evaluate__() of GetArtifact had no implementation.



Could you please confirm if this is an issue so that I can raise a JIRA
ticket and contribute for the same?



Regards,

Vaishali.