Return-Path: X-Original-To: archive-asf-public-internal@cust-asf2.ponee.io Delivered-To: archive-asf-public-internal@cust-asf2.ponee.io Received: from cust-asf.ponee.io (cust-asf.ponee.io [163.172.22.183]) by cust-asf2.ponee.io (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2CF832009F3 for ; Sat, 21 May 2016 00:54:55 +0200 (CEST) Received: by cust-asf.ponee.io (Postfix) id 2B785160A2A; Fri, 20 May 2016 22:54:55 +0000 (UTC) Delivered-To: archive-asf-public@cust-asf.ponee.io Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by cust-asf.ponee.io (Postfix) with SMTP id 4E7B4160A25 for ; Sat, 21 May 2016 00:54:54 +0200 (CEST) Received: (qmail 16809 invoked by uid 500); 20 May 2016 22:54:53 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@cloudstack.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list dev@cloudstack.apache.org Received: (qmail 16794 invoked by uid 99); 20 May 2016 22:54:53 -0000 Received: from pnap-us-west-generic-nat.apache.org (HELO spamd2-us-west.apache.org) (209.188.14.142) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 20 May 2016 22:54:53 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by spamd2-us-west.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at spamd2-us-west.apache.org) with ESMTP id A0C361A592F for ; Fri, 20 May 2016 22:54:52 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at spamd2-us-west.apache.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 1.179 X-Spam-Level: * X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.179 tagged_above=-999 required=6.31 tests=[DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=2, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=disabled Authentication-Results: spamd2-us-west.apache.org (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mx2-lw-eu.apache.org ([10.40.0.8]) by localhost (spamd2-us-west.apache.org [10.40.0.9]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id q10X6llgT32C for ; Fri, 20 May 2016 22:54:48 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-oi0-f52.google.com (mail-oi0-f52.google.com [209.85.218.52]) by mx2-lw-eu.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at mx2-lw-eu.apache.org) with ESMTPS id EF3535F2C3 for ; Fri, 20 May 2016 22:54:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-oi0-f52.google.com with SMTP id x19so201359454oix.2 for ; Fri, 20 May 2016 15:54:47 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to; bh=U4/LRyDmSrYHtydftR5zP8q0V07wv7O5tROjQ2G5Yo4=; b=OdM08OupQd/ytSHSHBr8hwSuB8SzqB/0UxoX4btRx1788Y+w1HkqPtDrYFxLvdKmYI MsT7PFvMqnCWnPpg4zhhCS+T6AFk7JLaaApf8pvukKgfkzcq/AkJusK65/rJw33ktNs+ oS8HQrOXv7wwG9vYMSfU736+2rZRw68U+mIvXQhoIvZJYAmeTJPRcBgcI+uXk2mPaa9C JCp/Lh6+VnZaVC5MBAULl0N8h3xgwu6of+C4vrGdOrC2+uU/yawOU1cp0yECimY7bW+G lsiIeFs4v2lFscITryAqoDGrZ1JCXhY3kJd/5munxZq8saTuxDOX/sEwhH0wzglyqoBr /z6A== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to; bh=U4/LRyDmSrYHtydftR5zP8q0V07wv7O5tROjQ2G5Yo4=; b=TbiXDJ9uxiwyu5Laa5vK+gcbbgVpkMSX/ZPB1ILPDXsmP0/CPG/o417osZLUuFePnx MiBNL3pAW3Hw/0x6VJ/jY+2M7uQzTR2wCBubYlvCtRF5xh9xGepFd6cOJ/uC8Gf83XZw JdDi0XwQGnu2igoBFy/HwiAnh4ue9cR7wu8BhOchnkaG/qIMjirjtI7a45sfXEsUyNs2 P8QvtVcjBDLww1jWqUJ65rAlYbaqt567EUE4wgjQlnwXT8MHg2FWSnbuRkDWbEe93a/w fqEcTdNto1p8ioEpnOVBrZYu5b8ycFQUYW/M43RrcxVPVqjoI1rBwIf7hUCmeR0+hQBL wCqQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOPr4FWk5zilZX7YTi4BtjzWuXBJTvRZ738+dIdF/I2mNQYEJygWo8aJakjcTxsxR4P49nNOWt1yZfRTOw23pQ== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.157.31.36 with SMTP id x33mr3749988otd.26.1463784886765; Fri, 20 May 2016 15:54:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.157.8.215 with HTTP; Fri, 20 May 2016 15:54:46 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <3497C24D-C446-4068-A156-D1920DA05848@persistent.co.in> <1463720005877.40747@netapp.com> <1463761654834.31029@netapp.com> Date: Fri, 20 May 2016 19:54:46 -0300 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Variable renaming in classes meant for Agents From: =?UTF-8?Q?Rafael_Weing=C3=A4rtner?= To: "dev@cloudstack.apache.org" Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a113e589634109505334dfa23 archived-at: Fri, 20 May 2016 22:54:55 -0000 --001a113e589634109505334dfa23 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable You are right Will. I am sorry for the link, here it is: https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/Coding+conventions On Fri, May 20, 2016 at 7:52 PM, Will Stevens wrote= : > Can you add your link for [1], I think you forgot to add the link. I was > not aware of a coding standard for this project. I know there has been > debated a lot recently about the preceding `_` on some variables. > Historically it was done that way, but recently a lot of people have take= n > offense to it. I don't care what format the community agrees on, but I > understand why people follow the existing styling. Also, I think that if > we ask someone to remove the `_` in their PR for a class, we should also > ask them to remove it for the entire class because the only thing worse > than not following a standard is to have both situations in a single > class. Thats just my opinion, but as a developer, that would drive me > nuts... > > *Will STEVENS* > Lead Developer > > *CloudOps* *| *Cloud Solutions Experts > 420 rue Guy *|* Montreal *|* Quebec *|* H3J 1S6 > w cloudops.com *|* tw @CloudOps_ > > On Fri, May 20, 2016 at 12:42 PM, Rafael Weing=C3=A4rtner < > rafaelweingartner@gmail.com> wrote: > > > You are right Mike about the =E2=80=9C_=E2=80=9D. The point is that in = some other > language > > the use of =E2=80=9C_=E2=80=9D makes sense, whereas in Java it does not= , at least not the > > way it has being used in ACS. > > > > We have code conventions, it can be found in [1]. The problem is that i= t > is > > a bit outdated and I think it could benefit from some others tutorials. > For > > instance, a clear and simple tutorial explaining what is a test case an= d > > showing how to create a proper test case; I am referring to the > > unit/integration test case that we write using Junit and other tools. > > > > Also, we lack some information on how to prepare code to be tested. > > Once we have that kind of standard defined and tutorials written, we > could > > work out ways to educate our community. It is not a problem not to know > > those things; we cannot expect everyone to know how to use every single > > methodology and technology that is out there. But, we can help people t= o > > learn, that is the point of a community, it should be a place where > people > > exchange ideas and experience in a way that benefits everyone. > > > > As soon as you open the PR, please let us know, so we can review it and > > help you get it merge as soon as possible. I think this is something th= at > > should go in the 4.9 release. > > > > > > On Fri, May 20, 2016 at 1:27 PM, Tutkowski, Mike < > > Mike.Tutkowski@netapp.com> > > wrote: > > > > > It sounds like most people don't like a preceding "_" for member > > variables > > > and that is fine. Do we have any formal Java coding standards for > > > CloudStack, by the way? I'm not aware of any. > > > > > > The main problem here, though, is that this particular piece of code = is > > > super fragile, so it would be great to harden it up. > > > > > > I'm going to open a PR and revert the names in those changed "Command= " > > > files for 4.9. That will solve the immediate problem. > > > ________________________________________ > > > From: Rafael Weing=C3=A4rtner > > > Sent: Friday, May 20, 2016 9:12 AM > > > To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org > > > Subject: Re: Variable renaming in classes meant for Agents > > > > > > Hi guys, > > > I agree with Daan that if class fields have improper (not descriptive > or > > > not suitable) names we should change them. However, I do not find the > > > change (on variable names) introduced by PR #816 good. It added an > > > =E2=80=9C_=E2=80=9D(underline) before variable names; even though Apa= che CloudStack > has a > > > lot of that currently, I think that is a pattern we should avoid. > > > > > > Your ideas to use annotations to avoid relying on variable names are > > great; > > > but, let=E2=80=99s not re-create the well here. There is a research [= 1] that > has > > > been conducted in 2014 that tackled exactly that problem; the proposa= l > > > presented in [1] decoupled client and server sides from variable name > by > > > using semantic annotations. The concept, the formalization and the > > > experiments are all presented in paper [1]. The serialization and > > > deserialization core of the proposal presented in [1] can be found in > > [2]. > > > > > > The idea of decoupling our web APIs from variable names is great, but > it > > is > > > something that will require some effort to be fully and properly > > > implemented. If you wish to push that forward count on me. > > > > > > [1] http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpls/abs_all.jsp?arnumber=3D6928953&ta= g=3D1 > > > [2] https://github.com/ivansalvadori/gsonld > > > > > > > > > On Fri, May 20, 2016 at 3:30 AM, Daan Hoogland < > daan.hoogland@gmail.com> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > Guys, we should rename fields that have improper names. I do not > agreee > > > > with the statement at all. Your two solutions to the serialisation > > hazard > > > > are both acceptable to me. leaving a non compliant or non explanato= ry > > > name > > > > in because it slipped through the nets at some points does not seem > > > > acceptable to me. We must improve are code. > > > > > > > > On Fri, May 20, 2016 at 6:53 AM, Tutkowski, Mike < > > > > Mike.Tutkowski@netapp.com> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > Thanks for sending out this e-mail, Anshul. > > > > > > > > > > This is a bit of a strange situation because we need to make sure > > > people > > > > > are either aware of the fact that properties in Command classes a= re > > > > > serialized (and not change existing variable names) or come up > with a > > > > less > > > > > fragile way of choosing property names when sending data (perhaps > > using > > > > > annotations). > > > > > > > > > > At the very least, we should have comments in these classes > > indicating > > > > the > > > > > dangers of changing property names. It might also be beneficial t= o > > have > > > > > unit tests in place that expect certain variable names and assert > if > > > they > > > > > are not as expected. > > > > > > > > > > In the meanwhile, I plan to change the variable names back that > were > > > > > changed in PR #816. > > > > > > > > > > Additional thoughts on how this should be addressed long term? > > > > > > > > > > Thanks! > > > > > Mike > > > > > ________________________________________ > > > > > From: Anshul Gangwar > > > > > Sent: Thursday, May 19, 2016 10:47 PM > > > > > To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org > > > > > Subject: Variable renaming in classes meant for Agents > > > > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > > > We should not allow renaming of variables in classes which ends > with > > > > > Command and TO. As these objects are meant to be consumed by > Agents. > > > > > > > > > > Agents may not be written in java so relying on these variable > names > > to > > > > > get the info. One such example is Hyper-V agent. > > > > > > > > > > Hyper-V support is currently broken as there are some variables > > renamed > > > > in > > > > > PR https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/816. > > > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > Anshul > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > DISCLAIMER > > > > > =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D > > > > > This e-mail may contain privileged and confidential information > which > > > is > > > > > the property of Accelerite, a Persistent Systems business. It is > > > intended > > > > > only for the use of the individual or entity to which it is > > addressed. > > > If > > > > > you are not the intended recipient, you are not authorized to rea= d, > > > > retain, > > > > > copy, print, distribute or use this message. If you have received > > this > > > > > communication in error, please notify the sender and delete all > > copies > > > of > > > > > this message. Accelerite, a Persistent Systems business does not > > accept > > > > any > > > > > liability for virus infected mails. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > Daan > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > Rafael Weing=C3=A4rtner > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Rafael Weing=C3=A4rtner > > > --=20 Rafael Weing=C3=A4rtner --001a113e589634109505334dfa23--