Age | Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Files | Lines |
|
Fixing the legacy guard policies and renaming them so we are
able to differentiate them.
Adding newer, cleaner TOSCA Guard Policies that match the operational
guard policies.
Removing legacy guard policies.
Fixing JUnit so that they don't use indexes to test whether versions
are changed correctly.
Added back in new guard policies. Fixed the guard policy types to use
camel case.
Issue-ID: POLICY-2243
Change-Id: Ie611f26f73f41e64c0b467f524f470739158f437
Signed-off-by: Pamela Dragosh <pdragosh@research.att.com>
|
|
Full validation including references to policy types and data types
added. Unit tests fixed to cope with new stricter validation.
Issue-ID: POLICY-1402
Change-Id: I59f37640a99494a53960a54d2fc82cc96861d43b
Signed-off-by: liamfallon <liam.fallon@est.tech>
|
|
The TOSCA specification has a "bug" in that it does not have a field to specify
the version of a policy type to use. We already had introduced the "type_version" field
for this.
This review introduces setting of the default version of a policy type to be
be used by a policy as the latest version of the policy type in the database.
As a side effect of this, we now have to check for existence of the policy type
of a policy in the database. This means that creation/update of a policy with
a non-existant policy type specified will now fail.
Issue-ID: POLICY-1738
Change-Id: I27080cf6cd358948810dab6897c72dfe4d41fe91
Signed-off-by: liamfallon <liam.fallon@est.tech>
|
|
Issue-ID: POLICY-1195
Change-Id: Id2dc5b5b490134648ca267e27b795f3f4c03bc7b
Signed-off-by: liamfallon <liam.fallon@est.tech>
|