Re: [pgadmin4][patch] Initial patch to decouple from ACI Tree

[Joao De Almeida Pereira]

You've lost us with the last reply. We'd love to know what we'd have to do
to get this patch committed. You mention that "some things are missing at
some places" and that "there are missing bits". Please note that this is
not a complete solution that we've offered so far. But only one step in a
grander effort to effect a more cleaner, more maintainable, more testable,
code base.

Thanks
Joao and Anthony.

On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 11:45 AM Ashesh Vashi 
wrote:

> On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 9:07 PM, Dave Page  wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 4:33 PM, Ashesh Vashi <
>> ashesh.va...@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 8:58 PM, Anthony Emengo 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 I was expecting a separate layer between the tree implementation, and
> aciTree adaptor.
> Please find the patch for the example.
> It will separate the two layers, and easy to replace with the new
> implementation in future.


 In general, we want defer the separation of the layers for now. Even
 though we might assume that this is the direction we want to go in. It's
 simply too early to be making such an architectural leap. For right now, we
 just know that we need the decoupling, but don't know what if we'd need the
 2 layers *as implemented*. The principle we're adhering to here is the
 Last Responsible Moment principle, which states that you only make the
 changes that you feel is necessary for the given problems you're facing:
 https://blog.codinghorror.com/the-last-responsible-moment/

 I would not like to see that changes in this patch.
> I would like us to come up with the actual design about the hot
> pluggability before going in this direction.


 In our point of view these 2 changes are not related. One thing is the
 internal code organization of the application, other thing is allowing
 third party to drop code in the application and it just work. These 2
 should be talked separately, but the hot pluggability is not something that
 will be address by this work we are doing right now.

>>> Neither - it should be part of this change.
>>> It should be addressed separately, and discussed.
>>>
>>
>> I agree. As long as this work doesn't make the pluggability problem
>> worse, that problem should be considered separately.
>>
>> So given Anthony's comments, are you happy with this patch?
>>
> I liked the design so far.
> But - as Khushboo mentioned ealier - it is missing at some places.
> I had to read through the code to understand the execution flow for some.
>
> And, there is still a lot missing bits, and pieces to consider for commit
> in the repo.
>
> -- Thanks, Ashesh
>
>>
>>
>>>
>>> -- Thanks, Ashesh
>>>

 Anthony && Joao

 On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 11:03 AM, Ashesh Vashi <
 ashesh.va...@enterprisedb.com> wrote:

>
>
>
> On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 8:30 PM, Ashesh Vashi <
> ashesh.va...@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
>
>> On Sat, Apr 28, 2018 at 3:55 AM, Joao De Almeida Pereira <
>> jdealmeidapere...@pivotal.io> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Hackers,
>>> As you are aware we kept on working on the patch, so we are
>>> attaching to this email a new version of the patch.
>>> This new version contains all the changes in the previous one plus
>>> more extractions of functions and refactoring of code.
>>>
>>> The objective of this patch is to create a separation between
>>> pgAdmin and the ACI Tree. We are doing this because we realized that at
>>> this point in time we have the ACI Tree all over the code of pgAdmin. I
>>> found a very interesting article that really talks about this:
>>> https://medium.freecodecamp.org/code-dependencies-are-the-devil-35ed28b556d
>>>
>>> In this patch there are some visions and ideas about the location of
>>> the code, the way to organize it and also try to pave the future for a
>>> application that is stable, easy to develop on and that can be release 
>>> at a
>>> times notice.
>>>
>>> We are investing a big chunk of our time in doing this refactoring,
>>> but while doing that we also try to respond to the patches sent to the
>>> mailing list. We would like the feedback from the community because we
>>> believe this is a changing point for the application. The idea is to 
>>> change
>>> the way we develop this application, instead of only correcting a bug of
>>> developing a feature, with every commit we should correct the bug or
>>> develop a feature but leave the code a little better than we found it
>>> (Refactoring, refactoring, refactoring). This is hard work but that is 
>>> what
>>> the users from pgAdmin expect from this community of developers.
>>>
>>>
>>> ==
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> It is a huge patch
>>>

pgAdmin 4 commit: Fix mis-edit.

[Dave Page]

Fix mis-edit.

Branch
--
master

Details
---
https://git.postgresql.org/gitweb?p=pgadmin4.git;a=commitdiff;h=c2122fbfb989fbc72db73e7bf64c92b4c8d11e86

Modified Files
--
Makefile | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

Re: [pgadmin4][patch] Initial patch to decouple from ACI Tree

[Ashesh Vashi]

On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 9:07 PM, Dave Page  wrote:

>
>
> On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 4:33 PM, Ashesh Vashi <
> ashesh.va...@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 8:58 PM, Anthony Emengo 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I was expecting a separate layer between the tree implementation, and
 aciTree adaptor.
 Please find the patch for the example.
 It will separate the two layers, and easy to replace with the new
 implementation in future.
>>>
>>>
>>> In general, we want defer the separation of the layers for now. Even
>>> though we might assume that this is the direction we want to go in. It's
>>> simply too early to be making such an architectural leap. For right now, we
>>> just know that we need the decoupling, but don't know what if we'd need the
>>> 2 layers *as implemented*. The principle we're adhering to here is the
>>> Last Responsible Moment principle, which states that you only make the
>>> changes that you feel is necessary for the given problems you're facing:
>>> https://blog.codinghorror.com/the-last-responsible-moment/
>>>
>>> I would not like to see that changes in this patch.
 I would like us to come up with the actual design about the hot
 pluggability before going in this direction.
>>>
>>>
>>> In our point of view these 2 changes are not related. One thing is the
>>> internal code organization of the application, other thing is allowing
>>> third party to drop code in the application and it just work. These 2
>>> should be talked separately, but the hot pluggability is not something that
>>> will be address by this work we are doing right now.
>>>
>> Neither - it should be part of this change.
>> It should be addressed separately, and discussed.
>>
>
> I agree. As long as this work doesn't make the pluggability problem worse,
> that problem should be considered separately.
>
> So given Anthony's comments, are you happy with this patch?
>
I liked the design so far.
But - as Khushboo mentioned ealier - it is missing at some places.
I had to read through the code to understand the execution flow for some.

And, there is still a lot missing bits, and pieces to consider for commit
in the repo.

-- Thanks, Ashesh

>
>
>>
>> -- Thanks, Ashesh
>>
>>>
>>> Anthony && Joao
>>>
>>> On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 11:03 AM, Ashesh Vashi <
>>> ashesh.va...@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
>>>



 On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 8:30 PM, Ashesh Vashi <
 ashesh.va...@enterprisedb.com> wrote:

> On Sat, Apr 28, 2018 at 3:55 AM, Joao De Almeida Pereira <
> jdealmeidapere...@pivotal.io> wrote:
>
>> Hi Hackers,
>> As you are aware we kept on working on the patch, so we are attaching
>> to this email a new version of the patch.
>> This new version contains all the changes in the previous one plus
>> more extractions of functions and refactoring of code.
>>
>> The objective of this patch is to create a separation between pgAdmin
>> and the ACI Tree. We are doing this because we realized that at this 
>> point
>> in time we have the ACI Tree all over the code of pgAdmin. I found a very
>> interesting article that really talks about this:
>> https://medium.freecodecamp.org/code-dependencies-are-the-de
>> vil-35ed28b556d
>>
>> In this patch there are some visions and ideas about the location of
>> the code, the way to organize it and also try to pave the future for a
>> application that is stable, easy to develop on and that can be release 
>> at a
>> times notice.
>>
>> We are investing a big chunk of our time in doing this refactoring,
>> but while doing that we also try to respond to the patches sent to the
>> mailing list. We would like the feedback from the community because we
>> believe this is a changing point for the application. The idea is to 
>> change
>> the way we develop this application, instead of only correcting a bug of
>> developing a feature, with every commit we should correct the bug or
>> develop a feature but leave the code a little better than we found it
>> (Refactoring, refactoring, refactoring). This is hard work but that is 
>> what
>> the users from pgAdmin expect from this community of developers.
>>
>>
>> ==
>>
>>
>>
>> It is a huge patch
>>   86 files changed, 5492 inserts, 1840
>> deletions
>> and we would like to get your feedback as soon as possible, because
>> we are continuing to work on it which means it is going to grow in size.
>>
>>
>> At this point in time we still have 124 of 176 calls to the function
>> itemData from ACITree.
>>
>> What does each patch contain:
>> 0001:
>>   Very simple patch, we found out that the linter was not looking
>> into all the javascript test files, so this patch will ensure it is
>>
> Committed the patch along with the 

Re: [pgadmin4][patch] Initial patch to decouple from ACI Tree

[Dave Page]

On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 4:33 PM, Ashesh Vashi  wrote:

>
> On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 8:58 PM, Anthony Emengo 
> wrote:
>
>> I was expecting a separate layer between the tree implementation, and
>>> aciTree adaptor.
>>> Please find the patch for the example.
>>> It will separate the two layers, and easy to replace with the new
>>> implementation in future.
>>
>>
>> In general, we want defer the separation of the layers for now. Even
>> though we might assume that this is the direction we want to go in. It's
>> simply too early to be making such an architectural leap. For right now, we
>> just know that we need the decoupling, but don't know what if we'd need the
>> 2 layers *as implemented*. The principle we're adhering to here is the
>> Last Responsible Moment principle, which states that you only make the
>> changes that you feel is necessary for the given problems you're facing:
>> https://blog.codinghorror.com/the-last-responsible-moment/
>>
>> I would not like to see that changes in this patch.
>>> I would like us to come up with the actual design about the hot
>>> pluggability before going in this direction.
>>
>>
>> In our point of view these 2 changes are not related. One thing is the
>> internal code organization of the application, other thing is allowing
>> third party to drop code in the application and it just work. These 2
>> should be talked separately, but the hot pluggability is not something that
>> will be address by this work we are doing right now.
>>
> Neither - it should be part of this change.
> It should be addressed separately, and discussed.
>

I agree. As long as this work doesn't make the pluggability problem worse,
that problem should be considered separately.

So given Anthony's comments, are you happy with this patch?


>
> -- Thanks, Ashesh
>
>>
>> Anthony && Joao
>>
>> On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 11:03 AM, Ashesh Vashi <
>> ashesh.va...@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 8:30 PM, Ashesh Vashi <
>>> ashesh.va...@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
>>>
 On Sat, Apr 28, 2018 at 3:55 AM, Joao De Almeida Pereira <
 jdealmeidapere...@pivotal.io> wrote:

> Hi Hackers,
> As you are aware we kept on working on the patch, so we are attaching
> to this email a new version of the patch.
> This new version contains all the changes in the previous one plus
> more extractions of functions and refactoring of code.
>
> The objective of this patch is to create a separation between pgAdmin
> and the ACI Tree. We are doing this because we realized that at this point
> in time we have the ACI Tree all over the code of pgAdmin. I found a very
> interesting article that really talks about this:
> https://medium.freecodecamp.org/code-dependencies-are-the-de
> vil-35ed28b556d
>
> In this patch there are some visions and ideas about the location of
> the code, the way to organize it and also try to pave the future for a
> application that is stable, easy to develop on and that can be release at 
> a
> times notice.
>
> We are investing a big chunk of our time in doing this refactoring,
> but while doing that we also try to respond to the patches sent to the
> mailing list. We would like the feedback from the community because we
> believe this is a changing point for the application. The idea is to 
> change
> the way we develop this application, instead of only correcting a bug of
> developing a feature, with every commit we should correct the bug or
> develop a feature but leave the code a little better than we found it
> (Refactoring, refactoring, refactoring). This is hard work but that is 
> what
> the users from pgAdmin expect from this community of developers.
>
>
> ==
>
>
>
> It is a huge patch
>   86 files changed, 5492 inserts, 1840
> deletions
> and we would like to get your feedback as soon as possible, because we
> are continuing to work on it which means it is going to grow in size.
>
>
> At this point in time we still have 124 of 176 calls to the function
> itemData from ACITree.
>
> What does each patch contain:
> 0001:
>   Very simple patch, we found out that the linter was not looking into
> all the javascript test files, so this patch will ensure it is
>
 Committed the patch along with the regression introduced because of
 this patch.

>
> 0002:
>   New Tree abstraction. This patch contains the new Tree that works as
> an adaptor for ACI Tree and is going to be used on all the extractions 
> that
> we are doing.
>

 I was expecting a separate layer between the tree implementation, and
 aciTree adaptor.
 Please find the patch for the example.

 It will separate the two layers, and easy to replace with the new

Re: [pgadmin4][patch] Initial patch to decouple from ACI Tree

[Ashesh Vashi]

On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 8:58 PM, Anthony Emengo  wrote:

> I was expecting a separate layer between the tree implementation, and
>> aciTree adaptor.
>> Please find the patch for the example.
>> It will separate the two layers, and easy to replace with the new
>> implementation in future.
>
>
> In general, we want defer the separation of the layers for now. Even
> though we might assume that this is the direction we want to go in. It's
> simply too early to be making such an architectural leap. For right now, we
> just know that we need the decoupling, but don't know what if we'd need the
> 2 layers *as implemented*. The principle we're adhering to here is the
> Last Responsible Moment principle, which states that you only make the
> changes that you feel is necessary for the given problems you're facing:
> https://blog.codinghorror.com/the-last-responsible-moment/
>
> I would not like to see that changes in this patch.
>> I would like us to come up with the actual design about the hot
>> pluggability before going in this direction.
>
>
> In our point of view these 2 changes are not related. One thing is the
> internal code organization of the application, other thing is allowing
> third party to drop code in the application and it just work. These 2
> should be talked separately, but the hot pluggability is not something that
> will be address by this work we are doing right now.
>
Neither - it should be part of this change.
It should be addressed separately, and discussed.

-- Thanks, Ashesh

>
> Anthony && Joao
>
> On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 11:03 AM, Ashesh Vashi <
> ashesh.va...@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 8:30 PM, Ashesh Vashi <
>> ashesh.va...@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On Sat, Apr 28, 2018 at 3:55 AM, Joao De Almeida Pereira <
>>> jdealmeidapere...@pivotal.io> wrote:
>>>
 Hi Hackers,
 As you are aware we kept on working on the patch, so we are attaching
 to this email a new version of the patch.
 This new version contains all the changes in the previous one plus more
 extractions of functions and refactoring of code.

 The objective of this patch is to create a separation between pgAdmin
 and the ACI Tree. We are doing this because we realized that at this point
 in time we have the ACI Tree all over the code of pgAdmin. I found a very
 interesting article that really talks about this:
 https://medium.freecodecamp.org/code-dependencies-are-the-de
 vil-35ed28b556d

 In this patch there are some visions and ideas about the location of
 the code, the way to organize it and also try to pave the future for a
 application that is stable, easy to develop on and that can be release at a
 times notice.

 We are investing a big chunk of our time in doing this refactoring, but
 while doing that we also try to respond to the patches sent to the mailing
 list. We would like the feedback from the community because we believe this
 is a changing point for the application. The idea is to change the way we
 develop this application, instead of only correcting a bug of developing a
 feature, with every commit we should correct the bug or develop a feature
 but leave the code a little better than we found it (Refactoring,
 refactoring, refactoring). This is hard work but that is what the users
 from pgAdmin expect from this community of developers.


 ==



 It is a huge patch
   86 files changed, 5492 inserts, 1840 deletions
 and we would like to get your feedback as soon as possible, because we
 are continuing to work on it which means it is going to grow in size.


 At this point in time we still have 124 of 176 calls to the function
 itemData from ACITree.

 What does each patch contain:
 0001:
   Very simple patch, we found out that the linter was not looking into
 all the javascript test files, so this patch will ensure it is

>>> Committed the patch along with the regression introduced because of this
>>> patch.
>>>

 0002:
   New Tree abstraction. This patch contains the new Tree that works as
 an adaptor for ACI Tree and is going to be used on all the extractions that
 we are doing.

>>>
>>> I was expecting a separate layer between the tree implementation, and
>>> aciTree adaptor.
>>> Please find the patch for the example.
>>>
>>> It will separate the two layers, and easy to replace with the new
>>> implemenation in future.
>>>
>>
>> Oops forgot to attach the patch.
>> Please find the patch attached.
>>
>> -- Thanks, Ashesh
>>
>>>
 0003:
   Code that extracts, wrap with tests and replace ACI Tree invocations.

>>> There are many small cases left in the patches.
>>> Hence - I would like to know the TODO list created by you.
>>>
>>> e.g. When we remove any of the object from the database server, we're
>>> 

Re: [pgadmin4][patch] Initial patch to decouple from ACI Tree

[Anthony Emengo]

>
> I was expecting a separate layer between the tree implementation, and
> aciTree adaptor.
> Please find the patch for the example.
> It will separate the two layers, and easy to replace with the new
> implementation in future.


In general, we want defer the separation of the layers for now. Even though
we might assume that this is the direction we want to go in. It's simply
too early to be making such an architectural leap. For right now, we just
know that we need the decoupling, but don't know what if we'd need the 2
layers *as implemented*. The principle we're adhering to here is the Last
Responsible Moment principle, which states that you only make the changes
that you feel is necessary for the given problems you're facing:
https://blog.codinghorror.com/the-last-responsible-moment/

I would not like to see that changes in this patch.
> I would like us to come up with the actual design about the hot
> pluggability before going in this direction.


In our point of view these 2 changes are not related. One thing is the
internal code organization of the application, other thing is allowing
third party to drop code in the application and it just work. These 2
should be talked separately, but the hot pluggability is not something that
will be address by this work we are doing right now.

Anthony && Joao

On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 11:03 AM, Ashesh Vashi <
ashesh.va...@enterprisedb.com> wrote:

>
>
>
> On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 8:30 PM, Ashesh Vashi <
> ashesh.va...@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
>
>> On Sat, Apr 28, 2018 at 3:55 AM, Joao De Almeida Pereira <
>> jdealmeidapere...@pivotal.io> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Hackers,
>>> As you are aware we kept on working on the patch, so we are attaching to
>>> this email a new version of the patch.
>>> This new version contains all the changes in the previous one plus more
>>> extractions of functions and refactoring of code.
>>>
>>> The objective of this patch is to create a separation between pgAdmin
>>> and the ACI Tree. We are doing this because we realized that at this point
>>> in time we have the ACI Tree all over the code of pgAdmin. I found a very
>>> interesting article that really talks about this:
>>> https://medium.freecodecamp.org/code-dependencies-are-the-de
>>> vil-35ed28b556d
>>>
>>> In this patch there are some visions and ideas about the location of the
>>> code, the way to organize it and also try to pave the future for a
>>> application that is stable, easy to develop on and that can be release at a
>>> times notice.
>>>
>>> We are investing a big chunk of our time in doing this refactoring, but
>>> while doing that we also try to respond to the patches sent to the mailing
>>> list. We would like the feedback from the community because we believe this
>>> is a changing point for the application. The idea is to change the way we
>>> develop this application, instead of only correcting a bug of developing a
>>> feature, with every commit we should correct the bug or develop a feature
>>> but leave the code a little better than we found it (Refactoring,
>>> refactoring, refactoring). This is hard work but that is what the users
>>> from pgAdmin expect from this community of developers.
>>>
>>>
>>> ==
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> It is a huge patch
>>>   86 files changed, 5492 inserts, 1840 deletions
>>> and we would like to get your feedback as soon as possible, because we
>>> are continuing to work on it which means it is going to grow in size.
>>>
>>>
>>> At this point in time we still have 124 of 176 calls to the function
>>> itemData from ACITree.
>>>
>>> What does each patch contain:
>>> 0001:
>>>   Very simple patch, we found out that the linter was not looking into
>>> all the javascript test files, so this patch will ensure it is
>>>
>> Committed the patch along with the regression introduced because of this
>> patch.
>>
>>>
>>> 0002:
>>>   New Tree abstraction. This patch contains the new Tree that works as
>>> an adaptor for ACI Tree and is going to be used on all the extractions that
>>> we are doing.
>>>
>>
>> I was expecting a separate layer between the tree implementation, and
>> aciTree adaptor.
>> Please find the patch for the example.
>>
>> It will separate the two layers, and easy to replace with the new
>> implemenation in future.
>>
>
> Oops forgot to attach the patch.
> Please find the patch attached.
>
> -- Thanks, Ashesh
>
>>
>>> 0003:
>>>   Code that extracts, wrap with tests and replace ACI Tree invocations.
>>>
>> There are many small cases left in the patches.
>> Hence - I would like to know the TODO list created by you.
>>
>> e.g. When we remove any of the object from the database server, we're not
>> yet removing the respective node from the new implementation, and its
>> children.
>>
>>>
>>>   We start creating new pattern for the location of Javascript files and
>>> their structure.
>>>
>> I would not like to see that changes in this patch.
>> I would like us to come up with the actual design about the hot
>> 

pgAdmin 4 commit: HAve the clean target zap any generated JS or CSS. Fi

[Dave Page]

HAve the clean target zap any generated JS or CSS. Fixes #3134

Branch
--
master

Details
---
https://git.postgresql.org/gitweb?p=pgadmin4.git;a=commitdiff;h=ae1b2149a1c87429f1024e2aa41bd29e2e0f3dbe

Modified Files
--
Makefile | 6 +-
1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

Re: Possibility to increase release frequency

[Robert Eckhardt]

On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 10:51 AM, Dave Page  wrote:
> Hi
>
> On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 3:33 PM, Robert Eckhardt 
> wrote:
>>
>> All,
>>
>> Currently we are starting to get a fair number of users leveraging
>> pgAdmin 4. Because of this we are finding new issues with Greenplum we
>> didn't previously know about and we would like to get the fixes for
>> those issues out as soon as possible.
>>
>> The current release process is shrouded in a bit of darkness for us so
>> I'm not sure what this ask even entails.
>
>
> I'm actively working on a buildfarm for doing automated official releases
> that folks other than I will have access to. Current status:
>
> - Jenkins host up and running
> - Automated dependency builds of zlib, OpenSSL and PostgreSQL running on
> Windows (just pgAdmin to go)
> - Automated dependency builds of OpenSSL and PostgreSQL running on macOS
> (just pgAdmin to go)
> - Automated dependency builds of PostgreSQL running on Linux
> - All test suites (JS linter and tests, Python PEP-8, unit/API and feature
> tests), components (message catalogs, docs, Qt4 & Qt5 runtime builds) and
> builds of pgAdmin (source, Python wheel) running on Linux and being tested
> against PG 9.3 - 10 and EPAS 9.4 - 10. I have had a (singular) successful
> feature test run, but most of the time they just time out at the moment.
>
> Once I have all the builds working as required for each platform, I intend
> to have them run regularly, and then setup smaller, targeted builds that
> will just produce the distribution packages on demand.
>
>>
>> Ask: what can we do to accelerate the release process? Can we help
>> automate builds or reduce the QA load or anything like that?
>>
>> Ideally we'd like to be releasing weekly, how can we move in that
>> direction?
>
>
> Right now we're still relying far too much on Fahar's manual testing for
> that to be a reality. He covers a lot of platform-specific tests on
> different distros with every release that often pickup showstoppers.

Makes perfect sense.

>
> I think the best way forward would be to continue with the Electron work so
> we can get away from using the browser in Desktop mode, and then once we
> have a stable and consistent desktop mode, continue to work on improving
> test coverage to minimise reliance on Fahar.

Electron is the next thing to get picked up by us.

Can you provide any insight into what Fahar does, one of the things
I've discussed is actually testing the installers after they have been
built. We didn't really have a plan for that so much so looking at
what was currently done could help generate some ideas.

-- Rob

>
> Thanks.
>
> --
> Dave Page
> Blog: http://pgsnake.blogspot.com
> Twitter: @pgsnake
>
> EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com
> The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

Re: [pgadmin4][patch] Initial patch to decouple from ACI Tree

[Ashesh Vashi]

On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 8:30 PM, Ashesh Vashi  wrote:

> On Sat, Apr 28, 2018 at 3:55 AM, Joao De Almeida Pereira <
> jdealmeidapere...@pivotal.io> wrote:
>
>> Hi Hackers,
>> As you are aware we kept on working on the patch, so we are attaching to
>> this email a new version of the patch.
>> This new version contains all the changes in the previous one plus more
>> extractions of functions and refactoring of code.
>>
>> The objective of this patch is to create a separation between pgAdmin and
>> the ACI Tree. We are doing this because we realized that at this point in
>> time we have the ACI Tree all over the code of pgAdmin. I found a very
>> interesting article that really talks about this:
>> https://medium.freecodecamp.org/code-dependencies-are-the-de
>> vil-35ed28b556d
>>
>> In this patch there are some visions and ideas about the location of the
>> code, the way to organize it and also try to pave the future for a
>> application that is stable, easy to develop on and that can be release at a
>> times notice.
>>
>> We are investing a big chunk of our time in doing this refactoring, but
>> while doing that we also try to respond to the patches sent to the mailing
>> list. We would like the feedback from the community because we believe this
>> is a changing point for the application. The idea is to change the way we
>> develop this application, instead of only correcting a bug of developing a
>> feature, with every commit we should correct the bug or develop a feature
>> but leave the code a little better than we found it (Refactoring,
>> refactoring, refactoring). This is hard work but that is what the users
>> from pgAdmin expect from this community of developers.
>>
>>
>> ==
>>
>>
>>
>> It is a huge patch
>>   86 files changed, 5492 inserts, 1840 deletions
>> and we would like to get your feedback as soon as possible, because we
>> are continuing to work on it which means it is going to grow in size.
>>
>>
>> At this point in time we still have 124 of 176 calls to the function
>> itemData from ACITree.
>>
>> What does each patch contain:
>> 0001:
>>   Very simple patch, we found out that the linter was not looking into
>> all the javascript test files, so this patch will ensure it is
>>
> Committed the patch along with the regression introduced because of this
> patch.
>
>>
>> 0002:
>>   New Tree abstraction. This patch contains the new Tree that works as an
>> adaptor for ACI Tree and is going to be used on all the extractions that we
>> are doing.
>>
>
> I was expecting a separate layer between the tree implementation, and
> aciTree adaptor.
> Please find the patch for the example.
>
> It will separate the two layers, and easy to replace with the new
> implemenation in future.
>

Oops forgot to attach the patch.
Please find the patch attached.

-- Thanks, Ashesh

>
>> 0003:
>>   Code that extracts, wrap with tests and replace ACI Tree invocations.
>>
> There are many small cases left in the patches.
> Hence - I would like to know the TODO list created by you.
>
> e.g. When we remove any of the object from the database server, we're not
> yet removing the respective node from the new implementation, and its
> children.
>
>>
>>   We start creating new pattern for the location of Javascript files and
>> their structure.
>>
> I would not like to see that changes in this patch.
> I would like us to come up with the actual design about the hot
> pluggability before going in this direction.
>
>>   Create patterns for creation of dialogs (backup and restore)
>>
> It's better - we don't change the directory structure at the moment.
>
> I am not against dividing the big javascript files in small chunks, but -
> I would like us to discuss first about the hot plugins design first.
>
> -- Thanks, Ashesh
>
>>
>>
>
>>
>> Thanks
>> Joao
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Apr 27, 2018 at 5:34 AM Ashesh Vashi <
>> ashesh.va...@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
>>
>>> I have quite a few comments for the patch.
>>> I will send them soon.
>>>
>>> On Fri, Apr 27, 2018, 14:45 Dave Page  wrote:
>>>
 How is your work on this going Ashesh? Will you be committing today?

 On Wed, Apr 25, 2018 at 8:52 AM, Dave Page  wrote:

> Ashesh; you had agreed to work on this early this week. Please ensure
> you do so today.
>
> Thanks.
>
> On Tue, Apr 24, 2018 at 8:13 PM, Joao De Almeida Pereira <
> jdealmeidapere...@pivotal.io> wrote:
>
>> Hi Hackers,
>>
>> Can someone review and merge this patch?
>>
>> Thanks
>> Joao
>>
>> On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 10:23 AM Joao De Almeida Pereira <
>> jdealmeidapere...@pivotal.io> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Hackers,
>>> Any other comment about this patch?
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>> Joao
>>>
>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 12:00 PM Joao De Almeida Pereira <
>>> jdealmeidapere...@pivotal.io> wrote:
>>>
 Hello Khushboo

Re: [pgadmin4][patch] Initial patch to decouple from ACI Tree

[Ashesh Vashi]

On Sat, Apr 28, 2018 at 3:55 AM, Joao De Almeida Pereira <
jdealmeidapere...@pivotal.io> wrote:

> Hi Hackers,
> As you are aware we kept on working on the patch, so we are attaching to
> this email a new version of the patch.
> This new version contains all the changes in the previous one plus more
> extractions of functions and refactoring of code.
>
> The objective of this patch is to create a separation between pgAdmin and
> the ACI Tree. We are doing this because we realized that at this point in
> time we have the ACI Tree all over the code of pgAdmin. I found a very
> interesting article that really talks about this:
> https://medium.freecodecamp.org/code-dependencies-are-the-
> devil-35ed28b556d
>
> In this patch there are some visions and ideas about the location of the
> code, the way to organize it and also try to pave the future for a
> application that is stable, easy to develop on and that can be release at a
> times notice.
>
> We are investing a big chunk of our time in doing this refactoring, but
> while doing that we also try to respond to the patches sent to the mailing
> list. We would like the feedback from the community because we believe this
> is a changing point for the application. The idea is to change the way we
> develop this application, instead of only correcting a bug of developing a
> feature, with every commit we should correct the bug or develop a feature
> but leave the code a little better than we found it (Refactoring,
> refactoring, refactoring). This is hard work but that is what the users
> from pgAdmin expect from this community of developers.
>
>
> ==
>
>
>
> It is a huge patch
>   86 files changed, 5492 inserts, 1840 deletions
> and we would like to get your feedback as soon as possible, because we are
> continuing to work on it which means it is going to grow in size.
>
>
> At this point in time we still have 124 of 176 calls to the function
> itemData from ACITree.
>
> What does each patch contain:
> 0001:
>   Very simple patch, we found out that the linter was not looking into all
> the javascript test files, so this patch will ensure it is
>
Committed the patch along with the regression introduced because of this
patch.

>
> 0002:
>   New Tree abstraction. This patch contains the new Tree that works as an
> adaptor for ACI Tree and is going to be used on all the extractions that we
> are doing.
>

I was expecting a separate layer between the tree implementation, and
aciTree adaptor.
Please find the patch for the example.

It will separate the two layers, and easy to replace with the new
implemenation in future.

>
> 0003:
>   Code that extracts, wrap with tests and replace ACI Tree invocations.
>
There are many small cases left in the patches.
Hence - I would like to know the TODO list created by you.

e.g. When we remove any of the object from the database server, we're not
yet removing the respective node from the new implementation, and its
children.

>
>   We start creating new pattern for the location of Javascript files and
> their structure.
>
I would not like to see that changes in this patch.
I would like us to come up with the actual design about the hot
pluggability before going in this direction.

>   Create patterns for creation of dialogs (backup and restore)
>
It's better - we don't change the directory structure at the moment.

I am not against dividing the big javascript files in small chunks, but - I
would like us to discuss first about the hot plugins design first.

-- Thanks, Ashesh

>
>

>
> Thanks
> Joao
>
>
> On Fri, Apr 27, 2018 at 5:34 AM Ashesh Vashi <
> ashesh.va...@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
>
>> I have quite a few comments for the patch.
>> I will send them soon.
>>
>> On Fri, Apr 27, 2018, 14:45 Dave Page  wrote:
>>
>>> How is your work on this going Ashesh? Will you be committing today?
>>>
>>> On Wed, Apr 25, 2018 at 8:52 AM, Dave Page  wrote:
>>>
 Ashesh; you had agreed to work on this early this week. Please ensure
 you do so today.

 Thanks.

 On Tue, Apr 24, 2018 at 8:13 PM, Joao De Almeida Pereira <
 jdealmeidapere...@pivotal.io> wrote:

> Hi Hackers,
>
> Can someone review and merge this patch?
>
> Thanks
> Joao
>
> On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 10:23 AM Joao De Almeida Pereira <
> jdealmeidapere...@pivotal.io> wrote:
>
>> Hi Hackers,
>> Any other comment about this patch?
>>
>> Thanks
>> Joao
>>
>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 12:00 PM Joao De Almeida Pereira <
>> jdealmeidapere...@pivotal.io> wrote:
>>
>>> Hello Khushboo
>>>
>>> On Mon, Apr 9, 2018 at 1:59 AM Khushboo Vashi <
>>> khushboo.va...@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
>>>
 Hi Joao,

 I have reviewed your patch and have some suggestions.

 On Sat, Apr 7, 2018 at 12:43 AM, Joao De Almeida Pereira <
 jdealmeidapere...@pivotal.io> wrote:

Re: Possibility to increase release frequency

[Dave Page]

Hi

On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 3:33 PM, Robert Eckhardt 
wrote:

> All,
>
> Currently we are starting to get a fair number of users leveraging
> pgAdmin 4. Because of this we are finding new issues with Greenplum we
> didn't previously know about and we would like to get the fixes for
> those issues out as soon as possible.
>
> The current release process is shrouded in a bit of darkness for us so
> I'm not sure what this ask even entails.
>

I'm actively working on a buildfarm for doing automated official releases
that folks other than I will have access to. Current status:

- Jenkins host up and running
- Automated dependency builds of zlib, OpenSSL and PostgreSQL running on
Windows (just pgAdmin to go)
- Automated dependency builds of OpenSSL and PostgreSQL running on macOS (just
pgAdmin to go)
- Automated dependency builds of PostgreSQL running on Linux
- All test suites (JS linter and tests, Python PEP-8, unit/API and feature
tests), components (message catalogs, docs, Qt4 & Qt5 runtime builds) and
builds of pgAdmin (source, Python wheel) running on Linux and being tested
against PG 9.3 - 10 and EPAS 9.4 - 10. I have had a (singular) successful
feature test run, but most of the time they just time out at the moment.

Once I have all the builds working as required for each platform, I intend
to have them run regularly, and then setup smaller, targeted builds that
will just produce the distribution packages on demand.


> Ask: what can we do to accelerate the release process? Can we help
> automate builds or reduce the QA load or anything like that?
>
> Ideally we'd like to be releasing weekly, how can we move in that
> direction?
>

Right now we're still relying far too much on Fahar's manual testing for
that to be a reality. He covers a lot of platform-specific tests on
different distros with every release that often pickup showstoppers.

I think the best way forward would be to continue with the Electron work so
we can get away from using the browser in Desktop mode, and then once we
have a stable and consistent desktop mode, continue to work on improving
test coverage to minimise reliance on Fahar.

Thanks.

-- 
Dave Page
Blog: http://pgsnake.blogspot.com
Twitter: @pgsnake

EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

pgAdmin 4 commit: Fixed the issues for all the javascript files reporte

[Ashesh Vashi]

Fixed the issues for all the javascript files reported by the liner.

Branch
--
master

Details
---
https://git.postgresql.org/gitweb?p=pgadmin4.git;a=commitdiff;h=c94439bf8ea7678722453f0e3750060bee31a074

Modified Files
--
.../backform_controls/keyboardshortcut_spec.js | 32 
.../javascript/backform_controls/keycode_spec.js   |  4 +-
.../javascript/browser/modify_animation_spec.js| 12 +--
.../server_groups/servers/model_validation_spec.js |  8 +-
.../javascript/common_keyboard_shortcuts_spec.js   | 12 +--
web/regression/javascript/debugger_utils_spec.js   |  6 +-
.../javascript/dialog_tab_navigator_spec.js| 86 +++---
web/regression/javascript/fake_endpoints.js|  2 +-
.../javascript/misc/statistics/statistics_spec.js  |  2 +-
.../sqleditor/calculate_query_run_time_spec.js |  6 +-
.../javascript/sqleditor/filter_dialog_specs.js|  7 +-
.../sqleditor/keyboard_shortcuts_spec.js   | 24 +++---
.../query_tool_http_error_handler_spec.js  | 42 +--
13 files changed, 121 insertions(+), 122 deletions(-)

pgAdmin 4 commit: Ensure the JS-linter is running on all the tests file

[Ashesh Vashi]

Ensure the JS-linter is running on all the tests files.

Branch
--
master

Details
---
https://git.postgresql.org/gitweb?p=pgadmin4.git;a=commitdiff;h=31e73f409693b46f6248f2d4fb9aeb4756891669
Author: Joao De Almeida Pereira 

Modified Files
--
web/pga_eslint.js | 9 +
1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

Re: [pgadmin4][patch] Initial patch to decouple from ACI Tree

[Ashesh Vashi]

On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 3:51 PM, Anthony Emengo  wrote:

> Hi there,
>
> Yes, there's a lot of TODO that we intend for this effort - to be
> submitted. We'd like to remove as much *direct* invocations on the ACI
> Tree library, as it causes a lot of coupling to the library. It is not the
> final patch, but we cannot come up with a definitive list of the things we
> intend to do, at this time.
>
Is there any known TODO list?
So that - I can help you figure out (if any more).

-- Thanks, Ashesh

>
> On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 2:16 AM, Ashesh Vashi <
> ashesh.va...@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Sat, Apr 28, 2018 at 3:55 AM, Joao De Almeida Pereira <
>> jdealmeidapere...@pivotal.io> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Hackers,
>>> As you are aware we kept on working on the patch, so we are attaching to
>>> this email a new version of the patch.
>>> This new version contains all the changes in the previous one plus more
>>> extractions of functions and refactoring of code.
>>>
>>> The objective of this patch is to create a separation between pgAdmin
>>> and the ACI Tree. We are doing this because we realized that at this point
>>> in time we have the ACI Tree all over the code of pgAdmin. I found a very
>>> interesting article that really talks about this:
>>> https://medium.freecodecamp.org/code-dependencies-are-the-de
>>> vil-35ed28b556d
>>>
>>> In this patch there are some visions and ideas about the location of the
>>> code, the way to organize it and also try to pave the future for a
>>> application that is stable, easy to develop on and that can be release at a
>>> times notice.
>>>
>>> We are investing a big chunk of our time in doing this refactoring, but
>>> while doing that we also try to respond to the patches sent to the mailing
>>> list. We would like the feedback from the community because we believe this
>>> is a changing point for the application. The idea is to change the way we
>>> develop this application, instead of only correcting a bug of developing a
>>> feature, with every commit we should correct the bug or develop a feature
>>> but leave the code a little better than we found it (Refactoring,
>>> refactoring, refactoring). This is hard work but that is what the users
>>> from pgAdmin expect from this community of developers.
>>>
>>>
>>> ==
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> It is a huge patch
>>>   86 files changed, 5492 inserts, 1840 deletions
>>> and we would like to get your feedback as soon as possible, because we
>>> are continuing to work on it which means it is going to grow in size.
>>>
>>>
>>> At this point in time we still have 124 of 176 calls to the function
>>> itemData from ACITree.
>>>
>>> What does each patch contain:
>>> 0001:
>>>   Very simple patch, we found out that the linter was not looking into
>>> all the javascript test files, so this patch will ensure it is
>>>
>>> 0002:
>>>   New Tree abstraction. This patch contains the new Tree that works as
>>> an adaptor for ACI Tree and is going to be used on all the extractions that
>>> we are doing
>>>
>>> 0003:
>>>   Code that extracts, wrap with tests and replace ACI Tree invocations.
>>>   We start creating new pattern for the location of Javascript files and
>>> their structure.
>>>   Create patterns for creation of dialogs (backup and restore)
>>>
>>
>> Do you have some TODO left for the same?
>> Or, is this the final one? Because - it gives us the better understanding
>> during reviewing the patch.
>>
>> -- Thanks, Ashesh
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>> Joao
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Apr 27, 2018 at 5:34 AM Ashesh Vashi <
>>> ashesh.va...@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
>>>
 I have quite a few comments for the patch.
 I will send them soon.

 On Fri, Apr 27, 2018, 14:45 Dave Page  wrote:

> How is your work on this going Ashesh? Will you be committing today?
>
> On Wed, Apr 25, 2018 at 8:52 AM, Dave Page  wrote:
>
>> Ashesh; you had agreed to work on this early this week. Please ensure
>> you do so today.
>>
>> Thanks.
>>
>> On Tue, Apr 24, 2018 at 8:13 PM, Joao De Almeida Pereira <
>> jdealmeidapere...@pivotal.io> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Hackers,
>>>
>>> Can someone review and merge this patch?
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>> Joao
>>>
>>> On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 10:23 AM Joao De Almeida Pereira <
>>> jdealmeidapere...@pivotal.io> wrote:
>>>
 Hi Hackers,
 Any other comment about this patch?

 Thanks
 Joao

 On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 12:00 PM Joao De Almeida Pereira <
 jdealmeidapere...@pivotal.io> wrote:

> Hello Khushboo
>
> On Mon, Apr 9, 2018 at 1:59 AM Khushboo Vashi <
> khushboo.va...@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi Joao,
>>
>> I have reviewed your patch and have some suggestions.
>>
>> On Sat, Apr 7, 2018 at 12:43 AM, Joao De Almeida 

Re: [pgadmin4][patch] Initial patch to decouple from ACI Tree

[Anthony Emengo]

Hi there,

Yes, there's a lot of TODO that we intend for this effort - to be
submitted. We'd like to remove as much *direct* invocations on the ACI Tree
library, as it causes a lot of coupling to the library. It is not the final
patch, but we cannot come up with a definitive list of the things we intend
to do, at this time.

On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 2:16 AM, Ashesh Vashi  wrote:

>
>
> On Sat, Apr 28, 2018 at 3:55 AM, Joao De Almeida Pereira <
> jdealmeidapere...@pivotal.io> wrote:
>
>> Hi Hackers,
>> As you are aware we kept on working on the patch, so we are attaching to
>> this email a new version of the patch.
>> This new version contains all the changes in the previous one plus more
>> extractions of functions and refactoring of code.
>>
>> The objective of this patch is to create a separation between pgAdmin and
>> the ACI Tree. We are doing this because we realized that at this point in
>> time we have the ACI Tree all over the code of pgAdmin. I found a very
>> interesting article that really talks about this:
>> https://medium.freecodecamp.org/code-dependencies-are-the-de
>> vil-35ed28b556d
>>
>> In this patch there are some visions and ideas about the location of the
>> code, the way to organize it and also try to pave the future for a
>> application that is stable, easy to develop on and that can be release at a
>> times notice.
>>
>> We are investing a big chunk of our time in doing this refactoring, but
>> while doing that we also try to respond to the patches sent to the mailing
>> list. We would like the feedback from the community because we believe this
>> is a changing point for the application. The idea is to change the way we
>> develop this application, instead of only correcting a bug of developing a
>> feature, with every commit we should correct the bug or develop a feature
>> but leave the code a little better than we found it (Refactoring,
>> refactoring, refactoring). This is hard work but that is what the users
>> from pgAdmin expect from this community of developers.
>>
>>
>> ==
>>
>>
>>
>> It is a huge patch
>>   86 files changed, 5492 inserts, 1840 deletions
>> and we would like to get your feedback as soon as possible, because we
>> are continuing to work on it which means it is going to grow in size.
>>
>>
>> At this point in time we still have 124 of 176 calls to the function
>> itemData from ACITree.
>>
>> What does each patch contain:
>> 0001:
>>   Very simple patch, we found out that the linter was not looking into
>> all the javascript test files, so this patch will ensure it is
>>
>> 0002:
>>   New Tree abstraction. This patch contains the new Tree that works as an
>> adaptor for ACI Tree and is going to be used on all the extractions that we
>> are doing
>>
>> 0003:
>>   Code that extracts, wrap with tests and replace ACI Tree invocations.
>>   We start creating new pattern for the location of Javascript files and
>> their structure.
>>   Create patterns for creation of dialogs (backup and restore)
>>
>
> Do you have some TODO left for the same?
> Or, is this the final one? Because - it gives us the better understanding
> during reviewing the patch.
>
> -- Thanks, Ashesh
>
>>
>>
>> Thanks
>> Joao
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Apr 27, 2018 at 5:34 AM Ashesh Vashi <
>> ashesh.va...@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
>>
>>> I have quite a few comments for the patch.
>>> I will send them soon.
>>>
>>> On Fri, Apr 27, 2018, 14:45 Dave Page  wrote:
>>>
 How is your work on this going Ashesh? Will you be committing today?

 On Wed, Apr 25, 2018 at 8:52 AM, Dave Page  wrote:

> Ashesh; you had agreed to work on this early this week. Please ensure
> you do so today.
>
> Thanks.
>
> On Tue, Apr 24, 2018 at 8:13 PM, Joao De Almeida Pereira <
> jdealmeidapere...@pivotal.io> wrote:
>
>> Hi Hackers,
>>
>> Can someone review and merge this patch?
>>
>> Thanks
>> Joao
>>
>> On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 10:23 AM Joao De Almeida Pereira <
>> jdealmeidapere...@pivotal.io> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Hackers,
>>> Any other comment about this patch?
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>> Joao
>>>
>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 12:00 PM Joao De Almeida Pereira <
>>> jdealmeidapere...@pivotal.io> wrote:
>>>
 Hello Khushboo

 On Mon, Apr 9, 2018 at 1:59 AM Khushboo Vashi <
 khushboo.va...@enterprisedb.com> wrote:

> Hi Joao,
>
> I have reviewed your patch and have some suggestions.
>
> On Sat, Apr 7, 2018 at 12:43 AM, Joao De Almeida Pereira <
> jdealmeidapere...@pivotal.io> wrote:
>
>> Hello Murtuza/Dave,
>> Yes now the extracted functions are spread into different files.
>> The intent would be to make the files as small as possible, and also 
>> to
>> group and name them in a way that would be easy 

Re: [pgAdmin4][Patch]: RM 3284 - F5 key not working consistently

[Khushboo Vashi]

Hi Joao,

The patches look good however I have noticed that you
deleted attachShortcut and attachDialogTabNavigatorShortcut functions from
keyboard.js, any specific reason for that?

Thanks,
Khushboo

On Fri, Apr 27, 2018 at 3:11 AM, Joao De Almeida Pereira <
jdealmeidapere...@pivotal.io> wrote:

> Hi Khushboo,
>
> I did some changes on your patch:
>  0001 - Your original patch
>  0002 - Convert keyboard.js to ES6
>  0003 - Refactoring of the keyboard.js file(some one letter variables and
> other code)
>
>
>
> Thanks
> Joao
>
> On Thu, Apr 26, 2018 at 5:34 AM Khushboo Vashi <
> khushboo.va...@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Please find the attached patch to fix the RM #3284 : F5 key not working
>> consistently.
>>
>> - Added the configurable keyboard shortcut (default F5) to refresh the
>> browser tree nodes.
>>
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Khushboo
>>
>

Re: [pgadmin4][patch] Initial patch to decouple from ACI Tree

[Ashesh Vashi]

On Sat, Apr 28, 2018 at 3:55 AM, Joao De Almeida Pereira <
jdealmeidapere...@pivotal.io> wrote:

> Hi Hackers,
> As you are aware we kept on working on the patch, so we are attaching to
> this email a new version of the patch.
> This new version contains all the changes in the previous one plus more
> extractions of functions and refactoring of code.
>
> The objective of this patch is to create a separation between pgAdmin and
> the ACI Tree. We are doing this because we realized that at this point in
> time we have the ACI Tree all over the code of pgAdmin. I found a very
> interesting article that really talks about this:
> https://medium.freecodecamp.org/code-dependencies-are-the-
> devil-35ed28b556d
>
> In this patch there are some visions and ideas about the location of the
> code, the way to organize it and also try to pave the future for a
> application that is stable, easy to develop on and that can be release at a
> times notice.
>
> We are investing a big chunk of our time in doing this refactoring, but
> while doing that we also try to respond to the patches sent to the mailing
> list. We would like the feedback from the community because we believe this
> is a changing point for the application. The idea is to change the way we
> develop this application, instead of only correcting a bug of developing a
> feature, with every commit we should correct the bug or develop a feature
> but leave the code a little better than we found it (Refactoring,
> refactoring, refactoring). This is hard work but that is what the users
> from pgAdmin expect from this community of developers.
>
>
> ==
>
>
>
> It is a huge patch
>   86 files changed, 5492 inserts, 1840 deletions
> and we would like to get your feedback as soon as possible, because we are
> continuing to work on it which means it is going to grow in size.
>
>
> At this point in time we still have 124 of 176 calls to the function
> itemData from ACITree.
>
> What does each patch contain:
> 0001:
>   Very simple patch, we found out that the linter was not looking into all
> the javascript test files, so this patch will ensure it is
>
> 0002:
>   New Tree abstraction. This patch contains the new Tree that works as an
> adaptor for ACI Tree and is going to be used on all the extractions that we
> are doing
>
> 0003:
>   Code that extracts, wrap with tests and replace ACI Tree invocations.
>   We start creating new pattern for the location of Javascript files and
> their structure.
>   Create patterns for creation of dialogs (backup and restore)
>

Do you have some TODO left for the same?
Or, is this the final one? Because - it gives us the better understanding
during reviewing the patch.

-- Thanks, Ashesh

>
>
> Thanks
> Joao
>
>
> On Fri, Apr 27, 2018 at 5:34 AM Ashesh Vashi <
> ashesh.va...@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
>
>> I have quite a few comments for the patch.
>> I will send them soon.
>>
>> On Fri, Apr 27, 2018, 14:45 Dave Page  wrote:
>>
>>> How is your work on this going Ashesh? Will you be committing today?
>>>
>>> On Wed, Apr 25, 2018 at 8:52 AM, Dave Page  wrote:
>>>
 Ashesh; you had agreed to work on this early this week. Please ensure
 you do so today.

 Thanks.

 On Tue, Apr 24, 2018 at 8:13 PM, Joao De Almeida Pereira <
 jdealmeidapere...@pivotal.io> wrote:

> Hi Hackers,
>
> Can someone review and merge this patch?
>
> Thanks
> Joao
>
> On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 10:23 AM Joao De Almeida Pereira <
> jdealmeidapere...@pivotal.io> wrote:
>
>> Hi Hackers,
>> Any other comment about this patch?
>>
>> Thanks
>> Joao
>>
>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 12:00 PM Joao De Almeida Pereira <
>> jdealmeidapere...@pivotal.io> wrote:
>>
>>> Hello Khushboo
>>>
>>> On Mon, Apr 9, 2018 at 1:59 AM Khushboo Vashi <
>>> khushboo.va...@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
>>>
 Hi Joao,

 I have reviewed your patch and have some suggestions.

 On Sat, Apr 7, 2018 at 12:43 AM, Joao De Almeida Pereira <
 jdealmeidapere...@pivotal.io> wrote:

> Hello Murtuza/Dave,
> Yes now the extracted functions are spread into different files.
> The intent would be to make the files as small as possible, and also 
> to
> group and name them in a way that would be easy to understand what 
> each
> file is doing without the need of opening it.
> As a example:
> static/js/backup will contain all the backup related
> functionality inside of this folder we can see the file:
>
 menu_utils.js At this moment in time we decided to group all the
> functions that are related to the menu, but we can split that also if 
> we
> believe it is easier to see.
>
 It's really very good to see the separated code for backup module.