I think google looks to be in pretty good shape, including appropriate use of weird builder
ex. weird builder is kindof ok when there exists a base resource from which everything else is derived. ex Resource vs Instance. https://github.com/jclouds/jclouds-labs-google/blob/master/google-compute-engine/src/main/java/org/jclouds/googlecomputeengine/domain/Resource.java https://github.com/jclouds/jclouds-labs-google/blob/master/google-compute-engine/src/main/java/org/jclouds/googlecomputeengine/domain/Instance.java However, things not sensible to extend have concrete builders. https://github.com/jclouds/jclouds-labs-google/blob/master/google-compute-engine/src/main/java/org/jclouds/googlecomputeengine/domain/ListPage.java I haven't reviewed through all of google, but each time I've accidentally entered, it has looked pretty good. -A On Wed, Oct 8, 2014 at 7:11 PM, Andrew Phillips <aphill...@qrmedia.com> wrote: >> I will volunteer to undebt one provider for each provider someone else >> volunteers for. Anyone with me? > > > I'm up! Any specific one that you feel would be a good example? > > Before we start, though: do we have an up-to-date list of what we consider > Good Practice and what we want to clean up here? I fully sympathize with > Inbar, but I think part of the problem here is that beyond copy-pasting > existing code I don't think we have anything outside of people's heads that > describes what we're actually looking for. The few dev guides we have [1, 2, > 3] certainly aren't enough. > > I obviously would love to be a position where all code has been cleaned up > to the point that copy-paste is in line with the jclouds State Of The Art. > Even if that is not the case, it would at least be great if contributors > could have somewhere to go for advice. And we should probably agree that > we'll prefer current guidelines over consistency with the rest of an older > codebase. > > Getting back to this one: draft of what we're looking for? > > * MWS tests > * No abstract builders > * Use Objects.equal in equals() > * Move common @Path to top of interface > * private, error-throwing constructors for domain objects created by > builders > > Is this the kind of stuff you have in mind? I'm just looking the PR by Inbar > that triggered this here... > > Regards > > ap > > [1] https://wiki.apache.org/jclouds/Coding%20Standards > [2] https://wiki.apache.org/jclouds/Best%20Practices > [3] https://wiki.apache.org/jclouds/Create%20a%20New%20API%20or%20Provider > > > >> >> -A >> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- >> From: "inbar stolberg" <notificati...@github.com> >> Date: Oct 8, 2014 4:51 PM >> Subject: Re: [jclouds] cinder availability zones api + list call >> implemented (#560) >> To: "jclouds/jclouds" <jclo...@noreply.github.com> >> Cc: >> >> In >> >> apis/openstack-cinder/src/main/java/org/jclouds/openstack/cinder/v1/extensions/ExtensionNamespaces.java: >> >>> + * See the License for the specific language governing permissions and >>> + * limitations under the License. >>> + */ >>> + >>> +package org.jclouds.openstack.cinder.v1.extensions; >>> + >>> +/** >>> + * Extension namespaces >>> + */ >>> +public final class ExtensionNamespaces { >>> + >>> + /** >>> + * Admin Action extension >>> + */ >>> + public static final String ADMIN_ACTIONS = >>> "http://docs.openstack.org/ext/admin-actions/api/v1.1";; >>> + >> >> >> 90% of this code is copy paste of existing code from the same branch not >> old code either ... >> I have no problem fixing this but doesnt seem like there is cosistency in >> the code if i can copy paste some thing and get rejected over 100 >> lines.... >> :/ >> >> — >> Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub >> <https://github.com/jclouds/jclouds/pull/560/files#r18620246>. >> > > > > -- > Andrew Phillips > qrmedia > > Unless expressly stated otherwise, this message is confidential. > Access to this e-mail by anyone else is unauthorised. If you are > not an addressee, any disclosure or copying of the contents of > this e-mail or any action taken (or not taken) in reliance on it > is unauthorised and may be unlawful. If you are not an addressee, > please inform the sender immediately. > > This message is confidential and may not be redistributed or > broadcast in whole or part in any form, including but not limited > to any form of internet transmission including email, usenet, > newsgroups, www, irc, icq, etc. > All liability for errors and viruses is disclaimed.
