Re: Review Request 17332: Add a noun supporting operations on roles

2014-02-06 Thread Jonathan Boulle
--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/17332/#review33811 --- src/main/python/apache/aurora/client/cli/role.py

Re: Review Request 17332: Add a noun supporting operations on roles

2014-02-06 Thread Mark Chu-Carroll
--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/17332/#review33814 --- src/main/python/apache/aurora/client/cli/role.py

Re: Review Request 17332: Add a noun supporting operations on roles

2014-02-06 Thread Jonathan Boulle
On Feb. 6, 2014, 6:36 p.m., Mark Chu-Carroll wrote: src/main/python/apache/aurora/client/cli/role.py, line 44 https://reviews.apache.org/r/17332/diff/1/?file=450590#file450590line44 Yes, this entire file was meant to be removed. I git mv'ed it to create quota.py and it's not in

Re: Review Request 17332: Add a noun supporting operations on roles

2014-02-06 Thread Mark Chu-Carroll
On Feb. 6, 2014, 1:36 p.m., Mark Chu-Carroll wrote: src/main/python/apache/aurora/client/cli/role.py, line 44 https://reviews.apache.org/r/17332/diff/1/?file=450590#file450590line44 Yes, this entire file was meant to be removed. I git mv'ed it to create quota.py and it's not in

Re: Review Request 17332: Add a noun supporting operations on roles

2014-02-06 Thread Kevin Sweeney
On Feb. 6, 2014, 10:36 a.m., Mark Chu-Carroll wrote: src/main/python/apache/aurora/client/cli/role.py, line 44 https://reviews.apache.org/r/17332/diff/1/?file=450590#file450590line44 Yes, this entire file was meant to be removed. I git mv'ed it to create quota.py and it's not in

Re: Review Request 17332: Add a noun supporting operations on roles

2014-02-06 Thread Jonathan Boulle
--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/17332/#review33825 --- Ship it! src/main/python/apache/aurora/client/cli/quota.py

Re: Review Request 17332: Add a noun supporting operations on roles

2014-02-06 Thread Mark Chu-Carroll
--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/17332/ --- (Updated Feb. 6, 2014, 2:19 p.m.) Review request for Aurora, Kevin Sweeney and

Re: Review Request 17332: Add a noun supporting operations on roles

2014-02-06 Thread Mark Chu-Carroll
--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/17332/ --- (Updated Feb. 6, 2014, 2:27 p.m.) Review request for Aurora, Kevin Sweeney and

Re: Review Request 17332: Add a noun supporting operations on roles

2014-02-05 Thread Mark Chu-Carroll
--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/17332/ --- (Updated Feb. 5, 2014, 10:08 a.m.) Review request for Aurora, Kevin Sweeney

Re: Review Request 17332: Add a noun supporting operations on roles

2014-02-04 Thread Mark Chu-Carroll
I disagree. To me, the fundamental issue is just what a quota is. Is a quota a primitive basic object which has the role/cluster/environment as an attribute? Or is the role the basic object, and the quota is an attribute of the role? I think that the quota as attribute of a user makes much more

Re: Review Request 17332: Add a noun supporting operations on roles

2014-02-04 Thread Toby Weingartner
As a possible extension, I could see something like: aurora quota get smf1/* = return quota information for all users -Toby. On Tue, Feb 4, 2014 at 1:24 PM, Toby Weingartner tweingart...@twopensource.com wrote: What else is hung on aurora user? I think I'm in Kevin's camp... but maybe

Re: Review Request 17332: Add a noun supporting operations on roles

2014-01-31 Thread Mark Chu-Carroll
On Jan. 24, 2014, 5:35 p.m., Kevin Sweeney wrote: Why is this happening on a role noun and not a quota noun. i.e. aurora quota get west/ksweeney v.s. aurora role get_quota west/ksweeney The second looks inconsistent with the noun-verb model to me and if we ever

Re: Review Request 17332: Add a noun supporting operations on roles

2014-01-31 Thread Kevin Sweeney
On Jan. 24, 2014, 2:35 p.m., Kevin Sweeney wrote: Why is this happening on a role noun and not a quota noun. i.e. aurora quota get west/ksweeney v.s. aurora role get_quota west/ksweeney The second looks inconsistent with the noun-verb model to me and if we ever

Re: Review Request 17332: Add a noun supporting operations on roles

2014-01-25 Thread Mark Chu-Carroll
Interesting idea... I just thought of quota as being a natural property of the role. Are there are quota verbs that would make sense? Maybe an automated quota request could be a verb? On Fri, Jan 24, 2014 at 5:35 PM, Kevin Sweeney kevi...@apache.org wrote: This is an automatically

Review Request 17332: Add a noun supporting operations on roles

2014-01-24 Thread Mark Chu-Carroll
--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/17332/ --- Review request for Aurora, Kevin Sweeney and Brian Wickman. Bugs: aurora-107

Re: Review Request 17332: Add a noun supporting operations on roles

2014-01-24 Thread Kevin Sweeney
--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/17332/#review32757 --- Why is this happening on a role noun and not a quota noun. i.e.