HistoryViewLinks to this page 2013 December 13 | 04:58 am

index / Automation Meetings / This page

Time: 11:00AM Eastern US (Currently 3pm UTC)


Chair: Umberto - Martin

  • Main agenda items:
  • Items for later phases/meetings:

    • Actions 2.0 - Best practice for inline/referenced resources (or a combination)?
    • Vocab document 2.1 update - New oslc:usage URI for template creation dialogs
  • UI scenarios

    • Email doesn’t say “resource not available” for scenario C, it says “action that’s not available” - MP to move to wiki and correct (and email out)
  • Availability
    • Juergen/Tim to update this scenario based on comments during meeting
    • Juergen/Tim to post another scenario on wiki for next week
    • JA will take a pass through this one for editorial issues.
    • Up to chairs to determine if there is agenda time to split meeting again.

Actions from last meeting not covered by agenda

All covered in agenda

Actions carried over/not yet due:

  • Actions 2.0
    • remove requirements (on Actions from Automation) from auto page - duplicated in Core Actions scenarios page - MP/JA
    • Generic consumer cases are not on scenarios page. - MP
    • Flesh out separation of interaction pattern from restrictions - MP


Attending: Umberto, Martin, Jurgen, John

  • New implementation: Jenkins (by Sam in Rational) - not in implementation reports (yet)
  • Actions - UI/dialogs
    • UC approves of reuse of template dialogs
    • UC suggested similarities between scenario (A) and Jurgen’s availability scenarios.
    • Jurgen hasn’t considered UI flow yet, but are interested in it.
    • Execute now vs execute later (template). Execute now = default? However default might need to be used to distinguish between multiple.
    • Link to creation factory?
      • UC: we could link to service provider (as there are many things we could look for).
      • MP : link to factory makes it a lot simpler
    • Two different types of “execute later” - user present vs user absent
    • Prefilling execution dialog with result from template dialog.
    • MP to put together examples of “execute later user absent” with path - reusing interaction patterns from action:request. (Also joins back with earlier work on identification of profiles, re: interaction patterns)
  • Availability
    • Description of availability resources from http:open services.netwikiautomationAvailability Scenarios
      • State = available or not available. (or intermediate, or problem)
      • Advanced features, such as history and replication metadata would be optional, as not all products provide them.
    • Discussion of “Obtain list of workloads” scenario.
    • Question on “Start & stop workload” scenario: UC: Why query observed states (steps 7 & 8) after you have already seen the automation result complete successfully? Jurgen: It might affect subsequent steps, but is optional.
    • UC: Consumers would preferably be able to support new unrecognised action types on providers.
    • MP: We could expose in the RDF how the properties will change. So consumers don’t need anything hard-coded based on types of actions.
    • UC: some actions won’t change the state, e.g. “recycle” (moves from available to available).
    • MP: Consumers shouldn’t rely on it. But we can still make it available for when it makes sense.
    • JA: For plans which are a “vote” into a policy, the plan can succeed (the vote is cast) but the state hasn’t changed.
    • MP: We need a mechanism beyond “state” for determining completion for actions that don’t change state (e.g. “recycle”).
    • Jurgen: The time that the state change happened will change.
    • MP: I’m happy that there is a way to define how the consumer detects the change - we just need to define it. (and make sure the simple cases stay simple)