Hi Andre, One of the main purposes of GLUE is to advertise information to clients. It is not aiming to model the internal workings of a services and only information that a client needs should be exposed. A client would not care about the garbage collection service so it would not be published. A client may care about a database service and the quality level would be a property of that service. The fact that the quality level was implemented by a hidden service is irrelevant for the client. Laurence Andre Merzky wrote:
Quoting [stephen.burke@stfc.ac.uk] (Mar 10 2010):
Service, Endpoint and AccessPolicy and I haven't noticed anything more for them.
Actually I just noticed one thing for Service which is slightly ambiguous. We have:
QualityLevel QualityLevel_t 1 The maturity of the Service in terms of the quality of the underlying software components; the value corresponds to the highest QualityLevel among the available Endpoints.
However you can potentially have a Service with no Endpoints - presumably you could still define its QualityLevel, but formally that description wouldn't apply.
Sorry if I jump into the discussion sideways - I am not really part of the glue group, just lurking here.
Anyway: yes, you certainly can have services w/o endpoints, or at least which have no need to expose an endpoint. For example, we have a garbage collection service which at specific intervals scans our data bases and purges expired entries. That service is never contacted from client side, and nobody really cares where it runs (apart from the deployment point of view of course).
And yes, that service could very well specify quality levels, such as run frequency.
Not sure if that is relevant to the discussion, just wanted to throw that in ;-)
Best, Andre.