On 06/17/2016 08:48 AM, Petr Spacek wrote:
If the cleanup is the same, or similar it might be more beneficial to
have it in a function where you could pass what was set up already and
therefore needs cleanup. But that's just an opinion coming from thinking
out loud as well. I went through the code to see if there's much cleanup
after these user actions and it seems that usually there's nothing much
if anything. However, thinking in advance may save us much trouble in
the future, of course.
On 17.6.2016 08:43, Stanislav Laznicka wrote:
On 06/17/2016 07:45 AM, Petr Spacek wrote:
On 16.6.2016 17:33, Stanislav Laznicka wrote:
This patch removes most sys.exits() from installer modules and scripts and
replaces them with ScriptError. I only left sys.exits at places where the user
decides yes/no on continuation of the script.
I wonder if yes/no should be replaced with KeyboardInterrupt or some other
I'm not sure, it seems more clear to just really exit if the user desires it
and it's what we say we'll do (with possible cleanup beforehand). Do you think
we could benefit somehow by raising an exception here?
I'm just thinking out loud.
It seemed to me that it is easier to share cleanup on one except block instead
of having if (interrupt): cleanup; if (interrupt2): same_cleanup;
Again, just wondering out loud.
Manage your subscription for the Freeipa-devel mailing list:
Contribute to FreeIPA: http://www.freeipa.org/page/Contribute/Code