Summary: pyosaf: Add NTF high-level bindings and sample applications [#1586]
Review request for Trac Ticket(s): #1586
Peer Reviewer(s): hans.nordeb...@ericsson.com, mathi.naic...@oracle.com,
hung.d.ngu...@dektech.com.au, srikanth.revan...@oracle.com
Pull request to: srikanth.revan...@oracle.com
Affected branch(es): 5.0
Development branch: opensaf-devel
--------------------------------
Impacted area Impact y/n
--------------------------------
Docs n
Build system n
RPM/packaging n
Configuration files n
Startup scripts n
SAF services n
OpenSAF services n
Core libraries n
Samples n
Tests n
Other y
Comments (indicate scope for each "y" above):
---------------------------------------------
This is a first version of a higher level mapping for NTF.
The assignment of additionalText does not work in this version. Instructions on
how
to fix it are very welcome. :-)
changeset 0d263e954bea9c9faa17a834aa269b5d5a9fc917
Author: Johan Mårtensson <johan.o.martens...@ericsson.com>
Date: Fri, 06 Nov 2015 15:56:08 +0100
pyosaf: Add NTF high-level bindings and sample applications [#1586]
Add high-level bindings and sample applications for NTF. A known issue
is
that the assignment of additionalText is not working.
Verify by using the ntfsend and ntfsubscribe sample applications.
Added Files:
------------
python/pyosaf/utils/ntf/__init__.py
python/pyosaf/utils/ntf/Makefile.am
python/samples/ntfsend
python/samples/ntfsubscribe
Complete diffstat:
------------------
opensaf.spec.in | 3 +
python/pyosaf/saNtf.py | 27 ++
python/pyosaf/utils/Makefile.am | 3 +-
python/pyosaf/utils/ntf/Makefile.am | 22 +
python/pyosaf/utils/ntf/__init__.py | 657
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
python/samples/README | 11 +
python/samples/ntfsend | 251 ++++++++++++++++++++++
python/samples/ntfsubscribe | 307 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++
8 files changed, 1280 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
Testing Commands:
-----------------
Verify by running the new ntfsend and ntfsubscribe sample commands.
Testing, Expected Results:
--------------------------
<<PASTE COMMAND OUTPUTS / TEST RESULTS>>
Conditions of Submission:
-------------------------
<<HOW MANY DAYS BEFORE PUSHING, CONSENSUS ETC>>
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.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Opensaf-devel mailing list
Opensaf-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensaf-devel
