HI Anders,

Will try to provide my review comments next week.

Regards,
Ramesh.

On 10/13/2016 9:22 PM, Anders Widell wrote:
> Hi Ramesh!
>
> Did you get a chance to look at this yet?
>
> regards,
>
> Anders Widell
>
>
> On 10/10/2016 04:54 PM, Anders Widell wrote:
>> Summary: base: Add classes for UNIX socket operations and log message 
>> formatting [#2064]
>> Review request for Trac Ticket(s): 2064
>> Peer Reviewer(s): Ramesh
>> Pull request to:
>> Affected branch(es): default(5.2)
>> Development branch: default
>>
>> --------------------------------
>> 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          y
>>   Samples                 n
>>   Tests                   n
>>   Other                   n
>>
>>
>> Comments (indicate scope for each "y" above):
>> ---------------------------------------------
>> v2:
>>
>> * Fix bugs in time stamp formatting (wrong seconds, missing validation
>>    of input parameters)
>> * Added a few more test cases for time stamp formatting
>>
>> changeset ea286178e02720d7d8859d4eabfbed785f48321a
>> Author:    Anders Widell <anders.wid...@ericsson.com>
>> Date:    Mon, 10 Oct 2016 16:50:15 +0200
>>
>>     base: Add classes for UNIX socket operations and log message 
>> formatting
>>     [#2064]
>>
>>     Add support classes for using UNIX sockets, and for formatting 
>> log messages
>>     according to rfc5424.
>>
>>
>> Complete diffstat:
>> ------------------
>>   osaf/libs/core/cplusplus/base/Makefile.am               |   13 
>> ++++++++-
>>   osaf/libs/core/cplusplus/base/buffer.h                  |  100 
>> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 
>>
>>   osaf/libs/core/cplusplus/base/log_message.cc            |  130 
>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>  
>>
>>   osaf/libs/core/cplusplus/base/log_message.h             |  186 
>> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>  
>>
>>   osaf/libs/core/cplusplus/base/tests/Makefile.am         |   12 
>> +++++---
>>   osaf/libs/core/cplusplus/base/tests/log_message_test.cc |  150 
>> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>  
>>
>>   osaf/libs/core/cplusplus/base/unix_client_socket.cc     |   52 
>> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>   osaf/libs/core/cplusplus/base/unix_client_socket.h      |   41 
>> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>   osaf/libs/core/cplusplus/base/unix_server_socket.cc     |   51 
>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>   osaf/libs/core/cplusplus/base/unix_server_socket.h      |   42 
>> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>   osaf/libs/core/cplusplus/base/unix_socket.cc            |   58 
>> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>   osaf/libs/core/cplusplus/base/unix_socket.h             |   89 
>> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>   12 files changed, 917 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
>>
>>
>> Testing Commands:
>> -----------------
>> make check
>>
>>
>> Testing, Expected Results:
>> --------------------------
>> All unit tests should pass
>>
>>
>> Conditions of Submission:
>> -------------------------
>> Ack from reviewer(s)
>>
>>
>> Arch      Built     Started    Linux distro
>> -------------------------------------------
>> mips        n          n
>> mips64      n          n
>> x86         n          n
>> x86_64      y          y
>> 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.
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>  
>>
>> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
>> engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
>> _______________________________________________
>> Opensaf-devel mailing list
>> Opensaf-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensaf-devel
>>
>


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most 
engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
Opensaf-devel mailing list
Opensaf-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensaf-devel

Reply via email to