Summary: IMM: Allow class schema change to add attribute default [#895]
Review request for Trac Ticket(s): 895
Peer Reviewer(s): Neel; (Zoran)
Pull request to:
Affected branch(es): default(4.5)
Development branch:
--------------------------------
Impacted area Impact y/n
--------------------------------
Docs n
Build system n
RPM/packaging n
Configuration files n
Startup scripts n
SAF services y
OpenSAF services n
Core libraries n
Samples n
Tests n
Other n
Comments (indicate scope for each "y" above):
---------------------------------------------
changeset 1bb3322830595313f59c11bc6330cafcd8d6d3fb
Author: Anders Bjornerstedt <anders.bjornerst...@ericsson.com>
Date: Fri, 11 Jul 2014 10:26:17 +0200
IMM: Allow class schema change to add attribute default [#895]
This enhancement removes the restriction of not allowing a class schema
change to add a default to an attribute definition. (Note: Removing a
default is still not allowed as it is inherrently not backwards
compatible.))
Only new instances of the class will get the default assigned when no
value
is provided for the attribute at object-create time.
Old instances with a null-value for the attribute will still have a
null-
value for that attribute even after the schema change. A general rule
for
schema changes is that the immsv never alters the value of existing
attributes as part of a schema change. Doing so would require the OI to
be
notified, which is not realistic since the shcema change is not
performed as
a CCB.
Complete diffstat:
------------------
osaf/services/saf/immsv/README | 19 ++++++++++++++++++-
osaf/services/saf/immsv/immnd/ImmModel.cc | 6 ------
2 files changed, 18 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
Testing Commands:
-----------------
Can be stested using two versions of a test class, such as the
one found under samples/immsv/immsv_test_classes.xml
Testing, Expected Results:
--------------------------
Adding a default value should work (not get rejected).
Conditions of Submission:
-------------------------
Ack from Neel.
Arch Built Started Linux distro
-------------------------------------------
mips n n
mips64 n n
x86 n n
x86_64 n n
powerpc n n
powerpc64 n n
Reviewer Checklist:
-------------------
[Submitters: make sure that your review doesn't trigger any checkmarks!]
Your checkin has not passed review because (see checked entries):
___ Your RR template is generally incomplete; it has too many blank entries
that need proper data filled in.
___ You have failed to nominate the proper persons for review and push.
___ Your patches do not have proper short+long header
___ You have grammar/spelling in your header that is unacceptable.
___ You have exceeded a sensible line length in your headers/comments/text.
___ You have failed to put in a proper Trac Ticket # into your commits.
___ You have incorrectly put/left internal data in your comments/files
(i.e. internal bug tracking tool IDs, product names etc)
___ You have not given any evidence of testing beyond basic build tests.
Demonstrate some level of runtime or other sanity testing.
___ You have ^M present in some of your files. These have to be removed.
___ You have needlessly changed whitespace or added whitespace crimes
like trailing spaces, or spaces before tabs.
___ You have mixed real technical changes with whitespace and other
cosmetic code cleanup changes. These have to be separate commits.
___ You need to refactor your submission into logical chunks; there is
too much content into a single commit.
___ You have extraneous garbage in your review (merge commits etc)
___ You have giant attachments which should never have been sent;
Instead you should place your content in a public tree to be pulled.
___ You have too many commits attached to an e-mail; resend as threaded
commits, or place in a public tree for a pull.
___ You have resent this content multiple times without a clear indication
of what has changed between each re-send.
___ You have failed to adequately and individually address all of the
comments and change requests that were proposed in the initial review.
___ You have a misconfigured ~/.hgrc file (i.e. username, email etc)
___ Your computer have a badly configured date and time; confusing the
the threaded patch review.
___ Your changes affect IPC mechanism, and you don't present any results
for in-service upgradability test.
___ Your changes affect user manual and documentation, your patch series
do not contain the patch that updates the Doxygen manual.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Open source business process management suite built on Java and Eclipse
Turn processes into business applications with Bonita BPM Community Edition
Quickly connect people, data, and systems into organized workflows
Winner of BOSSIE, CODIE, OW2 and Gartner awards
http://p.sf.net/sfu/Bonitasoft
_______________________________________________
Opensaf-devel mailing list
Opensaf-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensaf-devel
