This is a static archive of the previous Open Grid Forum GridForge content management system saved from host forge.ogf.org file /sf/go/artf5483?nav=1 at Fri, 04 Nov 2022 23:08:48 GMT SourceForge : artf5483: Should the activity interface be part of the same specification?

Project Home

Tracker

Documents

Tasks

Source Code

Discussions

File Releases

Wiki

Project Admin
Search Tracker
Project: OGSA-BES Working Group     Trackers > BES V1.0 > View Artifact
Artifact artf5483 : Should the activity interface be part of the same specification?
Tracker: BES V1.0
Title: Should the activity interface be part of the same specification?
Description:
Because there are a few places where the container and the activity interface (ManagedJob from ESI) overlap in function,
 e.g. state change requests and the state model, it would be simpler to keep them as one specification.

I woould argue for separate specs. The activity interface should follow the lead of the container and stay in sync, but 
not risk slowing down the publication of the container spce.
Submitted By: David Snelling
Submitted On: 06/21/2006 11:00 AM EDT
Last Modified: 08/24/2006 12:28 PM EDT
Closed: 08/24/2006 12:28 PM EDT

Status / Comments Change Log Associations Attachments  
 (2 Items)
Field Old Value New Value Date Performed By
Status
Open
Closed
08/24/2006 12:28 PM EDT Andrew Grimshaw
Closed 08/24/2006 08/24/2006 12:28 PM EDT Andrew Grimshaw

 
 
 
< Previous
 
 
Next >
 


The Open Grid Forum Contact Webmaster | Report a problem | GridForge Help
This is a static archive of the previous Open Grid Forum GridForge content management system saved from host forge.ogf.org file /sf/go/artf5483?nav=1 at Fri, 04 Nov 2022 23:08:52 GMT