It sounds like most people don't like a preceding "_" for member variables and that is fine. Do we have any formal Java coding standards for CloudStack, by the way? I'm not aware of any.
The main problem here, though, is that this particular piece of code is super fragile, so it would be great to harden it up. I'm going to open a PR and revert the names in those changed "Command" files for 4.9. That will solve the immediate problem. ________________________________________ From: Rafael Weingärtner <rafaelweingart...@gmail.com> Sent: Friday, May 20, 2016 9:12 AM To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org Subject: Re: Variable renaming in classes meant for Agents Hi guys, I agree with Daan that if class fields have improper (not descriptive or not suitable) names we should change them. However, I do not find the change (on variable names) introduced by PR #816 good. It added an “_”(underline) before variable names; even though Apache CloudStack has a lot of that currently, I think that is a pattern we should avoid. Your ideas to use annotations to avoid relying on variable names are great; but, let’s not re-create the well here. There is a research [1] that has been conducted in 2014 that tackled exactly that problem; the proposal presented in [1] decoupled client and server sides from variable name by using semantic annotations. The concept, the formalization and the experiments are all presented in paper [1]. The serialization and deserialization core of the proposal presented in [1] can be found in [2]. The idea of decoupling our web APIs from variable names is great, but it is something that will require some effort to be fully and properly implemented. If you wish to push that forward count on me. [1] http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpls/abs_all.jsp?arnumber=6928953&tag=1 [2] https://github.com/ivansalvadori/gsonld On Fri, May 20, 2016 at 3:30 AM, Daan Hoogland <daan.hoogl...@gmail.com> wrote: > Guys, we should rename fields that have improper names. I do not agreee > with the statement at all. Your two solutions to the serialisation hazard > are both acceptable to me. leaving a non compliant or non explanatory name > in because it slipped through the nets at some points does not seem > acceptable to me. We must improve are code. > > On Fri, May 20, 2016 at 6:53 AM, Tutkowski, Mike < > mike.tutkow...@netapp.com> > wrote: > > > Thanks for sending out this e-mail, Anshul. > > > > This is a bit of a strange situation because we need to make sure people > > are either aware of the fact that properties in Command classes are > > serialized (and not change existing variable names) or come up with a > less > > fragile way of choosing property names when sending data (perhaps using > > annotations). > > > > At the very least, we should have comments in these classes indicating > the > > dangers of changing property names. It might also be beneficial to have > > unit tests in place that expect certain variable names and assert if they > > are not as expected. > > > > In the meanwhile, I plan to change the variable names back that were > > changed in PR #816. > > > > Additional thoughts on how this should be addressed long term? > > > > Thanks! > > Mike > > ________________________________________ > > From: Anshul Gangwar <anshul.gang...@accelerite.com> > > Sent: Thursday, May 19, 2016 10:47 PM > > To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org > > Subject: Variable renaming in classes meant for Agents > > > > Hi, > > > > We should not allow renaming of variables in classes which ends with > > Command and TO. As these objects are meant to be consumed by Agents. > > > > Agents may not be written in java so relying on these variable names to > > get the info. One such example is Hyper-V agent. > > > > Hyper-V support is currently broken as there are some variables renamed > in > > PR https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/816. > > > > Regards, > > Anshul > > > > > > > > > > > > > > DISCLAIMER > > ========== > > This e-mail may contain privileged and confidential information which is > > the property of Accelerite, a Persistent Systems business. It is intended > > only for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed. If > > you are not the intended recipient, you are not authorized to read, > retain, > > copy, print, distribute or use this message. If you have received this > > communication in error, please notify the sender and delete all copies of > > this message. Accelerite, a Persistent Systems business does not accept > any > > liability for virus infected mails. > > > > > > -- > Daan > -- Rafael Weingärtner
