Is the new design doc publicly available somewhere?

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email protected] [mailto:caiman-discuss-
> [email protected]] On Behalf Of William Schumann
> Sent: 03 March 2011 17:14
> To: Dave Miner
> Cc: caiman-discuss
> Subject: Re: [caiman-discuss] Code review request: profile enhancements
> for automated installer
> 
> Dave,
> Please find responses inline.  Took your suggestions unless otherwise
noted.
> 
> current webrev: http://cr.opensolaris.org/~wmsch/profile4/
> differences with last webrev
http://cr.opensolaris.org/~wmsch/profile3-diff/
> 
> On 02/21/11 05:46 PM, Dave Miner wrote:
> > On 02/16/11 10:43 AM, William Schumann wrote:
> >> To reviewers, thank you.
> >> I have integrated some significant changes in two recent changesets:
> >> - webserver design changes
> >> - 7015429 Convert installadm.c to python
> >>
> >> For the webserver changes:
> >> I moved code formerly in my now defunct locate_profile.py to
> >> cgi_get_manifest.py Modified ai_get_manifest.py to get:
> >> - manifest
> >> - any profiles
> >> - any logging messages from the CGI that might be informative to the
> >> AI client user on the console
> >>
> >> Anyone familiar with webserver design changes, please check the above
> modules for any incorrect assumptions.
> >>
> >> I've not received any feedback on pyunit tests.
> >>
> >> current webrev: http://cr.opensolaris.org/~wmsch/profile3/
> >> differences with last webrev
> >> http://cr.opensolaris.org/~wmsch/profile2-diff/
> >> last webrev: http://cr.opensolaris.org/~wmsch/profile2/
> >>
> >
> > ai-webserver/Makefile, 87: had we previously discussed adding hostname
> here?
> hostname has been in the design document since the early revisions.  It
was
> missing from the Makefile due to an oversight.
> > I'm concerned about diverging possible criteria between manifests and
> profiles.
> CR 7006611 addresses adding hostname for manifests, so this much has been
> decided.  I'd suggest addressing manifests separately, since I don't see
any
> bugs here and the CR should be a fairly simple fix.
> >
> >
> > cgi_get_manifest.py
> >
> > 327: under what conditions do we run into a situation with criteria
missing?
> Does it happen when we're serving older clients?
> > Just want to understand if we're going to be generating a lot of noise
here
> or not.
> At the moment, it shouldn't happen at all.  I can see it happening in the
> future if new criteria is added - the old client sends the new server
different
> criteria.  However, in this instance, the protocol version added by John
would
> indicate the old protocol version and the CGI would log accordingly.
> >
> > 434: Why return this message to the client?  There's nothing it can do
> > about it and really doesn't affect the validity of the profile from the
client's
> point of view.
> Perhaps it is sufficient for the message to be sent only for 'validate'
and
> 'create-profile' subcommands.  Removing this logging entirely from
> client/server.
> >
> > export_profile.py, 120: s/delete/export/
> >
> > ai_get_manifest.py, 49: now that we have build 159, /system/volatile
> > would be preferred.  I presume we're going to let the upcoming AI->CUD
> relocate the manifest.xml our of /tmp?
> That sounds like a more efficient approach.  I'm working with the CUD
> engineers so that this will be done correctly.
> 
> Thank you,
> William
> 
> _______________________________________________
> caiman-discuss mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/caiman-discuss

_______________________________________________
caiman-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/caiman-discuss

Reply via email to