[devel] [PATCH 0/1] Review Request for base: Improve state report for opensafd [#2459]

2017-05-19 Thread Rafael Odzakow 
Summary: base: Improve state report for opensafd [#2459]
Review request for Ticket(s): 2459
Peer Reviewer(s): *** hans, anders
Pull request to: *** LIST THE PERSON WITH PUSH ACCESS HERE ***
Affected branch(es): develop
Development branch: ticket-2459
Base revision: 3327fbe68a0dfb978ba6ee316927d96381f42037
Personal repository: git://git.code.sf.net/u/erafodz/review


Impacted area   Impact y/n

 Docsn
 Build systemn
 RPM/packaging   n
 Configuration files n
 Startup scripts y
 SAF servicesn
 OpenSAF servicesn
 Core libraries  n
 Samples n
 Tests   n
 Other   n


Comments (indicate scope for each "y" above):
-
*** EXPLAIN/COMMENT THE PATCH SERIES HERE ***

revision 790dabad23cf7eab652dbb7ae5ea6052a3cccdf3
Author: Rafael Odzakow 
Date:   Fri, 19 May 2017 12:39:40 +0200

base: Improve state report for opensafd [#2459]

Internally opensafd creates a lock file during start/stop to avoid
parallel execution. To allow others to query the state this ticket will
use the opensafd lockfile to report the status of start/stop when
requested with "opensafd status"



Complete diffstat:
--
 src/nid/opensafd.in | 8 +++-
 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)


Testing Commands:
-
*** LIST THE COMMAND LINE TOOLS/STEPS TO TEST YOUR CHANGES ***


Testing, Expected Results:
--
*** PASTE COMMAND OUTPUTS / TEST RESULTS ***


Conditions of Submission:
-
*** HOW MANY DAYS BEFORE PUSHING, CONSENSUS ETC ***


Arch  Built StartedLinux distro
---
mipsn  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 ~/.gitconfig file (i.e. user.name, user.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

[devel] [PATCH 0/1] Review Request for base: Improve state report for opensafd [#2459]

2017-05-15 Thread Rafael Odzakow 
Summary: base: Improve state report for opensafd [#2459]
Review request for Ticket(s): 2459
Peer Reviewer(s): anders/hans
Pull request to: *** LIST THE PERSON WITH PUSH ACCESS HERE ***
Affected branch(es): develop
Development branch: ticket-2459
Base revision: 8c09ce778f01cd0b202a2b7b9fd51dbc14648674
Personal repository: git://git.code.sf.net/u/erafodz/review


Impacted area   Impact y/n

 Docsn
 Build systemn
 RPM/packaging   n
 Configuration files n
 Startup scripts y
 SAF servicesn
 OpenSAF servicesn
 Core libraries  n
 Samples n
 Tests   n
 Other   n


Comments (indicate scope for each "y" above):
-
*** EXPLAIN/COMMENT THE PATCH SERIES HERE ***

revision 5e1e02e828aa6be52034fdf134456cffbd94e9b9
Author: Rafael Odzakow 
Date:   Mon, 15 May 2017 15:49:13 +0200

base: Improve state report for opensafd [#2459]

Internally opensafd creates a lock file during start/stop to avoid
parallel execution. To allow others to query the state this ticket will
use the opensafd lockfile to report the status of start/stop when
requested with "opensafd status"



Complete diffstat:
--
 src/nid/opensafd.in | 19 ++-
 1 file changed, 18 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)


Testing Commands:
-
*** LIST THE COMMAND LINE TOOLS/STEPS TO TEST YOUR CHANGES ***


Testing, Expected Results:
--
*** PASTE COMMAND OUTPUTS / TEST RESULTS ***


Conditions of Submission:
-
*** HOW MANY DAYS BEFORE PUSHING, CONSENSUS ETC ***


Arch  Built StartedLinux distro
---
mipsn  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 ~/.gitconfig file (i.e. user.name, user.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