[email protected] wrote:
> I'm not suggesting that you should stop working.  My point is that
> you'll have less work to re-do if you add API functions as you go along.
> Adding a wrapper for set_authority probably wouldn't take a lot of
> effort; 
No issue with that - the Manage Repos has been around for some time and 
will need rewritten to use the Authority API, so not much gain in 
putting in a wrapper for just this single change. Still for the mime 
type addition which is new, I agree entirely that a wrapper is the way 
to go and will make sure to do so.

Cheers,

JR
> however, it would save you the trouble from having to fix that
> code again, when something in the underlying implementation is modified.
> Given that we're all busy, it seems like such an approach might be
> desireable, instead of scheduling time to re-write code that we know
> will get broken.
>
> *shrug*
>
> -j
>
> On Fri, Feb 06, 2009 at 11:30:29PM +0000, John Rice wrote:
>   
>> J - we do hear you loud and clear. The API bugs are filed, but we need 
>> to keep working whilst they are being implemented. We are aware that as 
>> soon as they are available we will need to change the code to use the 
>> API's, we've built this additional integration work into the schedule. 
>> It would be great if the API's were all available for us to use right 
>> now, but that is not the case and given the work loads the ips team is 
>> under, people are moving as fast they can. So its not ideal but using a 
>> limited number of private API's does let us make forward progress. Its 
>> only by getting the GUI features out there that we get feedback on what 
>> works what doesn't, what issues of scale and so on need to be addressed.
>>
>> Hopefully within the next month the various API's we need will come on 
>> stream and we can remove all reference to the private API's. At the same 
>> time the CLI can be changed to use these new API's so both clients are 
>> in sync and protected from underlying implementation changes in the ips 
>> core.
>>
>> JR
>>
>> [email protected] wrote:
>>     
>>> Once again, I'd like to repeat my warning about not using the client
>>> API.  The authority enable/disable code is reaching into the image
>>> object directly.  Despite lengthy discussions explaining why this is a
>>> bad idea, these warnings have fallen on deaf ears.  It's entirely likely
>>> that the authority implementation, and it's location in the image
>>> object, will change in a future putback.  This means that your authority
>>> support will end up being broken.  If you have an API method that is
>>> shared between the CLI and GUI, we can make sure these problems don't
>>> occur.
>>>
>>> If a method doesn't exist for an operation that you're trying to
>>> perform, file a bug against api-python or consider adding the support
>>> to the API.
>>>
>>> -j
>>>
>>> On Thu, Feb 05, 2009 at 12:38:25PM +0000, Michal Pryc wrote:
>>>   
>>>       
>>>> Padraig,
>>>> LGTM, with one minor cosmetic thing:
>>>>
>>>> http://cr.opensolaris.org/~padraig/ips-6014-v2/src/gui/modules/repository.py.wdiff.html
>>>>
>>>> Line: 354 (is this empty line needed?)
>>>>
>>>> Michal
>>>>
>>>> Padraig O'Briain wrote:
>>>>     
>>>>         
>>>>> The webrev http://cr.opensolaris.org/~padraig/ips-6014-v1/ fixes
>>>>> 6014 Would like ability to disable authorities rather than deleting them
>>>>> 5202 Catalog is refreshed too often for Manage Repositories dialog
>>>>> operations
>>>>>
>>>>> A check box is added to the repository list to allow enabling and
>>>>> disabling of a repository.
>>>>> All the rows have been made sortable but the data is initially presented
>>>>> unsorted.
>>>>> For 5202 we avoid refreshing the catalog if the only changes the user
>>>>> made was to change the preferred authority and change it back to the
>>>>> original preferred authority before closing.
>>>>>
>>>>> Padraig
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> pkg-discuss mailing list
>>>>> [email protected]
>>>>> http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-discuss
>>>>>       
>>>>>           
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> pkg-discuss mailing list
>>>> [email protected]
>>>> http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-discuss
>>>>     
>>>>         
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> pkg-discuss mailing list
>>> [email protected]
>>> http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-discuss
>>>   
>>>       
>> _______________________________________________
>> pkg-discuss mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-discuss
>>     

_______________________________________________
pkg-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-discuss

Reply via email to