Summary: pyosaf: [Updated] Fix Ccb and ImmObject classes to handle more inputs
[#1663]
Review request for Trac Ticket(s): #1663
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): 4.7
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):
---------------------------------------------
Updated according to Hung's review comment.
changeset a0ab6b0ed67707b972a2091095d7a704c1ac8f6f
Author: Johan Mårtensson <johan.o.martens...@ericsson.com>
Date: Mon, 18 Jan 2016 09:41:05 +0100
pyosaf: Fix Ccb and ImmObject classes to handle more inputs [#1663]
Fix the Ccb class to allow entering values as atoms in modify operations
when there is only a single value affected.
Fix ImmObject to automatically prepend <rdn-attribute-name>= to the RDN
attribute value to make it adhere to the format expected by IMM, if the
user
only provided the actual value.
Complete diffstat:
------------------
python/pyosaf/utils/immom/ccb.py | 12 ++++++++++++
python/pyosaf/utils/immom/object.py | 5 +++++
2 files changed, 17 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
Testing Commands:
-----------------
1. Load the sample classes: immcfg -f python/samples/sample-classes.xml
2. Create an initial sample instance: immcfg -c SampleClass1 sampleClassId=1
3. Run the following python test program:
#!/usr/bin/env python
from pyosaf.utils.immom.ccb import Ccb
from pyosaf.utils import immom
from pyosaf.utils.immom.object import ImmObject
# Test current behavior
ccb = Ccb(flags=None)
ccb.modify_value_replace('sampleClassId=1', 'attribute1', ['abc'])
ccb.apply()
print '%s == %s' % ('abc', immom.get('sampleClassId=1').attribute1)
# Test common mistake
ccb = Ccb(flags=None)
ccb.modify_value_replace('sampleClassId=1', 'attribute1', 'abcd')
ccb.apply()
print '%s == %s' % ('abcd', immom.get('sampleClassId=1').attribute1)
# Test current behavior
ccb = Ccb(flags=None)
ccb.modify_value_replace('sampleClassId=1', 'attribute1', [])
ccb.modify_value_add('sampleClassId=1', 'attribute1', ['def'])
ccb.apply()
print '%s in %s' % ('def', immom.get('sampleClassId=1').attribute1)
# Test common mistake
ccb = Ccb(flags=None)
ccb.modify_value_replace('sampleClassId=1', 'attribute1', [])
ccb.modify_value_add('sampleClassId=1', 'attribute1', 'defg')
ccb.apply()
print '%s in %s' % ('defg', immom.get('sampleClassId=1').attribute1)
# Test current behavior
ccb = Ccb(flags=None)
ccb.modify_value_replace('sampleClassId=1', 'attribute1', 'def')
ccb.modify_value_delete('sampleClassId=1', 'attribute1', ['def'])
ccb.apply()
print '%s not in %s' % ('def', immom.get('sampleClassId=1').attribute1)
# Test common mistake
ccb = Ccb(flags=None)
ccb.modify_value_replace('sampleClassId=1', 'attribute1', 'defg')
ccb.modify_value_delete('sampleClassId=1', 'attribute1', 'defg')
ccb.apply()
print '%s not in %s' % ('defg', immom.get('sampleClassId=1').attribute1)
# Create Imm object old style
obj = ImmObject(class_name='SampleClass1')
obj.sampleClassId = 'sampleClassId=2'
ccb = Ccb(flags=None)
ccb.create(obj)
ccb.apply()
print 'Object exists, sampleClassId=2: %s' % immom.get('sampleClassId=2').dn
# Create Imm object new style
obj2 = ImmObject(class_name='SampleClass1')
obj2.sampleClassId = '33'
ccb = Ccb(flags=None)
ccb.create(obj2)
ccb.apply()
print 'Object exists, sampleClassId=33: %s' % immom.get('sampleClassId=33').dn
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.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Site24x7 APM Insight: Get Deep Visibility into Application Performance
APM + Mobile APM + RUM: Monitor 3 App instances at just $35/Month
Monitor end-to-end web transactions and take corrective actions now
Troubleshoot faster and improve end-user experience. Signup Now!
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=267308311&iu=/4140
_______________________________________________
Opensaf-devel mailing list
Opensaf-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensaf-devel
