search

oam-dev / spec

Open Application Model (OAM).
https://oam.dev
Other
3.04k stars 246 forks source link

Extended application scopes to move to appendix #143

Open mikkelhegn opened 5 years ago

mikkelhegn commented 5 years ago

Following up on #42 and PR #105 looks like at least the non-core app scopes have not been moved. Suggest moving the non-core app scopes: https://github.com/microsoft/hydra-spec/blob/master/4.application_scopes.md#extended-application-scope-type-definitions.

I would also suggest we consider the namespace for these. They are currently: identity.hydra.io/v1.IdentityScope resources.hydra.io/v1.ResourceQuotaScope

It feels like an explosion of top namespaces to happen, by using e.g. identity and resources. I would suggest they all fall under extension.hydra.io.

technosophos commented 5 years ago

Yeah, I think extension.hydra.io is a good place to put things like this.

macolso commented 5 years ago

so extension.hydra.io would include standard and extended types for both scopes and traits?

hongchaodeng commented 5 years ago

@macolso Standard and extended should be different groups. They have different requirements: standard is recommended to implement by runtimes and very popular in the community; and extended are curated selections, but very new in the community and not extensively adopted yet.

macolso commented 5 years ago

Ya, I can see the value add in separating where we keep standard and extended types. Is there a reason why we have only defined standard types for traits and not scopes?

mikkelhegn commented 5 years ago

Picking up the question from @macolso, I've taken the liberty to suggest aligning across all three extension points (workload types, traits and application scopes) and do the necessary changes to explain the extension points. I also move the core workload types, traits and application scopes definitions to separate folders (like we have scaffolded for standard. I think it improves the readability of the specification.

PR incoming...

Hope y'all agree this is ok given the lesser scope of the issue :-)