Re: [devel] [PATCH 0 of 1] Review Request for IMMTOOLS: revert old way of parsing default values and add a flag for more strict parsing values in immcfg [#861]
Thanks for the comment. I'll add it to the help before I push the code. Thanks, Zoran -Original Message- From: Reddy Neelakanta Reddy Peddavandla [mailto:reddy.neelaka...@oracle.com] Sent: den 24 april 2014 16:07 To: Zoran Milinkovic Cc: opensaf-devel@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: Re: [PATCH 0 of 1] Review Request for IMMTOOLS: revert old way of parsing default values and add a flag for more strict parsing values in immcfg [#861] Hi zoran, Reviewed and tested the patch with minor comment. Ack. --strict must be mentioned in the help of immcfg. /Neel. - Original Message - From: zoran.milinko...@ericsson.com To: reddy.neelaka...@oracle.com Cc: opensaf-devel@lists.sourceforge.net Sent: Tuesday, April 22, 2014 8:28:08 PM GMT +05:30 Chennai, Kolkata, Mumbai, New Delhi Subject: [PATCH 0 of 1] Review Request for IMMTOOLS: revert old way of parsing default values and add a flag for more strict parsing values in immcfg [#861] Summary: IMMTOOLS: revert old way of parsing default values and add a flag for more strict parsing values in immcfg [#861] Review request for Trac Ticket(s): 861 Peer Reviewer(s): Neelakanta Pull request to: Zoran Affected branch(es): opensaf-4.4.x, default(4.5) Development branch: opensaf-4.4.x Impacted area Impact y/n Docsn Build systemn RPM/packaging n Configuration files n Startup scripts n SAF servicesy OpenSAF servicesn Core libraries n Samples n Tests n Other n Comments (indicate scope for each y above): - changeset c59d3d9d25a39fd3325a3f455ac10c551f4b93ad Author: Zoran Milinkovic zoran.milinko...@ericsson.com Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2014 16:52:30 +0200 IMMTOOLS: revert old way of parsing default values and add a flag for more strict parsing values in immcfg [#861] For backwards compatibility, it's needed to revert the code for old way of parsing default values. Flag --strict is added for a more strict parsing values, which fail immcfg if an attribute value does not match the attribute data type. Complete diffstat: -- osaf/tools/safimm/immcfg/imm_cfg.c | 13 + osaf/tools/safimm/immcfg/imm_import.cc | 34 ++ 2 files changed, 31 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-) Testing Commands: - immcfg --strict -L imm.xml immcfg -L imm.xml immcfg --strict -f imm.xml immcfg -f imm.xml Testing, Expected Results: -- Create an XML file with a class that has an attribute of integer type, and string default value. immcfg with new flag --strict should fail for both -f and -L. If --strict flag is missing, immcfg with -f and -L should succeed to load and verify XML file. Conditions of Submission: - Ack from Neelakanta 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
Re: [devel] [PATCH 0 of 1] Review Request for IMMTOOLS: revert old way of parsing default values and add a flag for more strict parsing values in immcfg [#861]
Hi zoran, Reviewed and tested the patch with minor comment. Ack. --strict must be mentioned in the help of immcfg. /Neel. - Original Message - From: zoran.milinko...@ericsson.com To: reddy.neelaka...@oracle.com Cc: opensaf-devel@lists.sourceforge.net Sent: Tuesday, April 22, 2014 8:28:08 PM GMT +05:30 Chennai, Kolkata, Mumbai, New Delhi Subject: [PATCH 0 of 1] Review Request for IMMTOOLS: revert old way of parsing default values and add a flag for more strict parsing values in immcfg [#861] Summary: IMMTOOLS: revert old way of parsing default values and add a flag for more strict parsing values in immcfg [#861] Review request for Trac Ticket(s): 861 Peer Reviewer(s): Neelakanta Pull request to: Zoran Affected branch(es): opensaf-4.4.x, default(4.5) Development branch: opensaf-4.4.x Impacted area Impact y/n Docsn Build systemn RPM/packaging n Configuration files n Startup scripts n SAF servicesy OpenSAF servicesn Core libraries n Samples n Tests n Other n Comments (indicate scope for each y above): - changeset c59d3d9d25a39fd3325a3f455ac10c551f4b93ad Author: Zoran Milinkovic zoran.milinko...@ericsson.com Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2014 16:52:30 +0200 IMMTOOLS: revert old way of parsing default values and add a flag for more strict parsing values in immcfg [#861] For backwards compatibility, it's needed to revert the code for old way of parsing default values. Flag --strict is added for a more strict parsing values, which fail immcfg if an attribute value does not match the attribute data type. Complete diffstat: -- osaf/tools/safimm/immcfg/imm_cfg.c | 13 + osaf/tools/safimm/immcfg/imm_import.cc | 34 ++ 2 files changed, 31 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-) Testing Commands: - immcfg --strict -L imm.xml immcfg -L imm.xml immcfg --strict -f imm.xml immcfg -f imm.xml Testing, Expected Results: -- Create an XML file with a class that has an attribute of integer type, and string default value. immcfg with new flag --strict should fail for both -f and -L. If --strict flag is missing, immcfg with -f and -L should succeed to load and verify XML file. Conditions of Submission: - Ack from Neelakanta 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 ~/.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
[devel] [PATCH 0 of 1] Review Request for IMMTOOLS: revert old way of parsing default values and add a flag for more strict parsing values in immcfg [#861]
Summary: IMMTOOLS: revert old way of parsing default values and add a flag for more strict parsing values in immcfg [#861] Review request for Trac Ticket(s): 861 Peer Reviewer(s): Neelakanta Pull request to: Zoran Affected branch(es): opensaf-4.4.x, default(4.5) Development branch: opensaf-4.4.x Impacted area Impact y/n Docsn Build systemn RPM/packaging n Configuration files n Startup scripts n SAF servicesy OpenSAF servicesn Core libraries n Samples n Tests n Other n Comments (indicate scope for each y above): - changeset c59d3d9d25a39fd3325a3f455ac10c551f4b93ad Author: Zoran Milinkovic zoran.milinko...@ericsson.com Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2014 16:52:30 +0200 IMMTOOLS: revert old way of parsing default values and add a flag for more strict parsing values in immcfg [#861] For backwards compatibility, it's needed to revert the code for old way of parsing default values. Flag --strict is added for a more strict parsing values, which fail immcfg if an attribute value does not match the attribute data type. Complete diffstat: -- osaf/tools/safimm/immcfg/imm_cfg.c | 13 + osaf/tools/safimm/immcfg/imm_import.cc | 34 ++ 2 files changed, 31 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-) Testing Commands: - immcfg --strict -L imm.xml immcfg -L imm.xml immcfg --strict -f imm.xml immcfg -f imm.xml Testing, Expected Results: -- Create an XML file with a class that has an attribute of integer type, and string default value. immcfg with new flag --strict should fail for both -f and -L. If --strict flag is missing, immcfg with -f and -L should succeed to load and verify XML file. Conditions of Submission: - Ack from Neelakanta 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 ~/.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. -- Start Your Social Network Today - Download eXo Platform Build your Enterprise Intranet with eXo Platform Software Java Based Open Source Intranet - Social, Extensible, Cloud Ready Get Started Now And Turn Your
