Contents
This document records Implementation Reports for providers and consumers of the OSLC Automation 2.0 specification.
Providers
Rational Quality Manager 4.0.1
Contact information:
- Contacts: PramodChandoria, PaulMcMahan
- 4.0.1 (GA scheduled for November 2012)
Details about support:
- OSLC Automation 2.0
- Provides a OSLC Service Provider for the Test Automation subdomain
- Full CRUD, Query, and Resource Shape support
- No UI Preview or Creation / Selection Dialog support at this time
Table of supported capabilities: See Google SpreadSheet
Additional details about support: (not noted in table)
- Supports delegation of Automation Request handling to external consumers
Issues:
- RQM has an existing test execution framework that supports advanced scenarios where test execution is delegated to external agents (aka “execution adapters”). In order to provide a minimal implementation of the Automation V1 specification that can coexist with this existing framework RQM needed to define a provisional type of resource called an AutomationAdapter that is not discussed (at least directly) in the V1 specification. The workgroup might decide to discuss these additional scenarios in a subsequent version of the specification.
Worked well:
- Alignment of the test, build, and deploy scenarios into a common set of resources and state transitions worked out surprisingly well. As more implementations of the V1 spec start to surface it will be interesting to see what other types of scenarios can fit into this pattern as well.
- The specification’s close binding with OSLC Core and the many similarities to the concepts in other domains such as CM, QM, and RM helped implementation go smoothly.
- The availability of open source tooling in Eclipse Lyo was a tremendous help and sped up implementation.
JazzSM
Contact information:
- Contacts: Joe Ross, John Arwe
- 1.1 (GA planned for Q1 2013)
Details about support:
- OSLC Automation 2.0
- Automation provider for synchronous operations on the JazzSM Registry
- Only a creation factory for POST of synchronous Automation Requests is supported. Automation Results are included in the response to the POST. Neither Requests nor Results are persisted, so there is no query capability to retrieve them. Automation Plans are not supported as retrievable resources, they are just URIs used to identify the type of request that is being made.
Table of supported capabilities: See Google SpreadSheet
Additional details about support: (not noted in table)
Issues:
- No significant issues that were not addressed by the spec.
Worked well:
- We were basically looking for an OSLC way to implement remote procedure call, and this fit the bill.
Eclipse Lyo Reference Implementation
Contact information:
- Contacts: Eclipse Lyo (lyo-dev@eclipse.org)
- Product version: N/A - the Lyo OSLC samples are continuously improved and added to.
Details about support:
- OSLC Automation 2.0
- Supports synchronous and asynchronous automation styles
- Includes delegated UIs for selection of Automation Plans and creation of Automation Requests
- Includes HTML representations of resources
- Uses OSLC4J
- Does not currently support OSLC Query
Table of supported capabilities: See Google SpreadSheet
Additional details about support: (not noted in table)
Issues:
- No major issues. This was a “green field” implementation and OSLC4J was well-suited to its development. If anything, OSLC4J is currently lacking in samples and APIs to help build delegated UIs.
Worked well:
- Defining the Java resources for the Automation artifacts was straighforward
- Building the GET, POST, PUT, etc services was simple - follow the examples of other OSLC4J samples
- The provider also acts as a consumer in some cases (resource linking and link validation). The OSLC4J client API was well suited to this.
Consumers
Eclipse Lyo Automation Test Suite
Contact information:
- Contacts: Eclipse Lyo (lyo-dev@eclipse.org)
- Product version: N/A - the Lyo OSLC samples are continuously improved and added to.
Details about support:
- OSLC Automation 2.0
- Tests OSLC V2 Core and Automation MUST requirements
- Tests RDF/XML, XML and JSON representations of:
- ServiceProviderCatalog
- ServiceProvider
- AutomationPlan
- AutomationRequest
- AutomationResult
- Not all Automation MUSTs are covered yet. Development is continuing
Table of supported capabilities: See Google SpreadSheet
Additional details about support: (not noted in table)
Issues:
- No major issues
Worked well:
- Using existing OSLC domain suites as a basis for the new Automation artifacts
- Core tests were automatically covered once Automation was added to DynamicSuiteBuilder.java
