> On March 21, 2012, 8:54 p.m., Alexander Neundorf wrote:
> > I did not yet have time to look through the git branch...
> >
> > So, kauth, we have a bunch of cmake macros related to this in
> > kdelibs/cmake/KDE4Macros.cmake, right ?
> > What about them ?
They are already in ${CMAKE_SOURCE_DIR}/staging/kauth/cmake/KAuthMacros.cmake
- Stephen
-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
http://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/104337/#review11717
-----------------------------------------------------------
On March 18, 2012, 10:25 p.m., Dario Freddi wrote:
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> http://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/104337/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
>
> (Updated March 18, 2012, 10:25 p.m.)
>
>
> Review request for kdelibs, Kevin Ottens, David Faure, and Alexander Neundorf.
>
>
> Description
> -------
>
> Preamble - sorry for having to name-call people but apparently we still don't
> have a frameworks way for reviewing code (which sucks). And sorry for the
> long summary, but it's worth reading. However.
>
> This huge patchsets brings KAuth in the marvelous world of Frameworks. If you
> dislike ReviewBoard's way of displaying diffs or simply want to see a commit
> list, please refer to the URL in "Branch".
>
> First of all, I pulled in a dependency on KJob after a chat with Kevin. This
> makes KAuth tier2, but shouldn't be a big issue.
>
> Then there's the hard part: source compatibility is reasonably broken here.
> The changes I had to do were mostly for the sake of revamping the internal
> workflow of the library. The main problem KAuth had was the fact it was
> completely synchronous, leading to a multitude of problems. After these
> changes it's fully asynchronous instead (reason for pulling in KJob), the API
> was simplified, and some unused features like multiple action execution have
> been removed.
>
> The main changes at a glance:
>
> * Some renaming to the enums
> * Moving Action & ActionReply to be implicitly shared
> * Removing ActionWatcher (now useless due to the new semantics of execute
> * Removing some useless APIs from Action, namely executeActions,
> execute(helper)
> * execute() now returns a KJob
> * helperID() -> helperId()
> * Static action replies are now static accessors returning a new instance.
> This was a complete mistake in the first place, but it's still there with a
> different semantic to ease porting. The main use case for changing this is a
> failure to handle implicitly shared classes in multithreaded environments
> with that approach.
>
> Of course, while it would be awesome to have all the code reviewed, I
> understand it's a very big change so I'd like at least some feedback on the
> following points:
>
> * General sanity of the new API
> * Consistency of the enums. StatusInvalid vs. ExecuteMode vs.
> AuthorizationDeniedError. While the semantic seems correct to me, I'd like to
> have some feedback on whether consistency is valuable in the ordering of
> <type><value> vs. <value><type> and which one should be preferred in case.
> * Whether to deprecate static accessors such as static const ActionReply
> SuccessReply(). I strongly favor this.
> * Whether the new dependency of kcoreaddons for the sake of using KJob is
> reasonable or I should go for a different alternative.
> * CMake sanity for the new dependency of kcoreaddons.
>
> The code is pretty much unit-tested and it should have a decent coverage,
> even if I had no way to check this. For unit tests, I had to create a fake
> authorization backend for testing purposes, whereas I managed to reuse the
> dbus backend for helper communication, so that I could even test that. For
> running the helper and the client in the same process, in the unit test I am
> resorting to making the dbus service of the helper live in a separate thread,
> to prevent asynchronous DBus calls from failing due to QDBus' local-loop
> optimization. The test is also run on the session bus.
>
>
> Diffs
> -----
>
> staging/kauth/CMakeLists.txt PRE-CREATION
> staging/kauth/autotests/BackendsManager.h PRE-CREATION
> staging/kauth/autotests/BackendsManager.cpp PRE-CREATION
> staging/kauth/autotests/CMakeLists.txt PRE-CREATION
> staging/kauth/autotests/HelperTest.cpp PRE-CREATION
> staging/kauth/autotests/SetupActionTest.cpp PRE-CREATION
> staging/kauth/autotests/TestBackend.h PRE-CREATION
> staging/kauth/autotests/TestBackend.cpp PRE-CREATION
> staging/kauth/autotests/TestHelper.h PRE-CREATION
> staging/kauth/autotests/TestHelper.cpp PRE-CREATION
> staging/kauth/src/AuthBackend.h PRE-CREATION
> staging/kauth/src/CMakeLists.txt PRE-CREATION
> staging/kauth/src/HelperProxy.h PRE-CREATION
> staging/kauth/src/backends/dbus/DBusHelperProxy.h PRE-CREATION
> staging/kauth/src/backends/dbus/DBusHelperProxy.cpp PRE-CREATION
> staging/kauth/src/backends/dbus/org.kde.auth.xml PRE-CREATION
> staging/kauth/src/backends/fake/FakeBackend.cpp PRE-CREATION
> staging/kauth/src/backends/fakehelper/FakeHelperProxy.h PRE-CREATION
> staging/kauth/src/backends/fakehelper/FakeHelperProxy.cpp PRE-CREATION
> staging/kauth/src/backends/mac/AuthServicesBackend.cpp PRE-CREATION
> staging/kauth/src/backends/policykit/PolicyKitBackend.cpp PRE-CREATION
> staging/kauth/src/backends/polkit-1/Polkit1Backend.cpp PRE-CREATION
> staging/kauth/src/kauthaction.h PRE-CREATION
> staging/kauth/src/kauthaction.cpp PRE-CREATION
> staging/kauth/src/kauthactionreply.h PRE-CREATION
> staging/kauth/src/kauthactionreply.cpp PRE-CREATION
> staging/kauth/src/kauthactionwatcher.h PRE-CREATION
> staging/kauth/src/kauthactionwatcher.cpp PRE-CREATION
> staging/kauth/src/kauthexecutejob.h PRE-CREATION
> staging/kauth/src/kauthexecutejob.cpp PRE-CREATION
>
> Diff: http://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/104337/diff/
>
>
> Testing
> -------
>
> New unit tests pass 100%
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Dario Freddi
>
>
