Re: fixPath (was: committer wanted for review)

On Fri, Jun 21, 2013 at 09:38:56AM +0200, Daan Hoogland wrote: > On Fri, Jun 21, 2013 at 6:18 AM, Prasanna Santhanam wrote: > > > > To my mind, we overuse String throughout the codebase when we > > > should either be using richer types provided by the Java runtime > > > (e.g. java.net.URI) or def

Re: fixPath (was: committer wanted for review)

On Fri, Jun 21, 2013 at 09:38:56AM +0200, Daan Hoogland wrote: > On Fri, Jun 21, 2013 at 6:18 AM, Prasanna Santhanam wrote: > > > > To my mind, we overuse String throughout the codebase when we > > > should either be using richer types provided by the Java runtime > > > (e.g. java.net.URI) or def

Re: fixPath (was: committer wanted for review)

On Fri, Jun 21, 2013 at 6:18 AM, Prasanna Santhanam wrote: > > To my mind, we overuse String throughout the codebase when we > > should either be using richer types provided by the Java runtime > > (e.g. java.net.URI) or defining custom value objects. In addition > > to better levering the type

Re: fixPath (was: committer wanted for review)

On Thu, Jun 20, 2013 at 06:07:05PM -0400, John Burwell wrote: > Edison, > > As I mentioned in a previous email, it feels like a good place for > Path value object that encapsulates behavior. I propose we throw > this topic on the board for Sunday's Storage Architecture session, > and bring the re

Re: fixPath (was: committer wanted for review)

, June 20, 2013 1:03 PM >> To: dev >> Subject: Re: fixPath (was: committer wanted for review) >> >> Yes, got it. It is quite big. It is dealing with more than just a path >> format, isn't it? >> > Yah, I agree the patch changes too much(join path, and rem

RE: fixPath (was: committer wanted for review)

> -Original Message- > From: Daan Hoogland [mailto:daan.hoogl...@gmail.com] > Sent: Thursday, June 20, 2013 1:03 PM > To: dev > Subject: Re: fixPath (was: committer wanted for review) > > Yes, got it. It is quite big. It is dealing with more than just a path >

Re: fixPath (was: committer wanted for review)

cooked by Fred Wittekind < > r...@twister.dyndns.org> one year ago. > > > -Original Message- > > From: Daan Hoogland [mailto:daan.hoogl...@gmail.com] > > Sent: Thursday, June 20, 2013 12:13 AM > > To: dev > > Subject: Re: fixPath (was: committer want

RE: fixPath (was: committer wanted for review)

, 2013 12:13 AM > To: dev > Subject: Re: fixPath (was: committer wanted for review) > > I am not authorized to access the link you are sending Edison, but interested > in the contents. Could you send it please? > > > On Wed, Jun 19, 2013 at 10:26 PM, Edison Su wrote: >

Re: fixPath (was: committer wanted for review)

m] > Sent: Wednesday, June 19, 2013 12:38 PM > To: dev > Subject: fixPath (was: committer wanted for review) > > John and others, > I have been looking for the point where the wrong path is instantiated. > After analyses I came to the DownloadAnswer class which contains the >

RE: fixPath (was: committer wanted for review)

issue, without changing too much code. From: Daan Hoogland [mailto:daan.hoogl...@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, June 19, 2013 12:38 PM To: dev Subject: fixPath (was: committer wanted for review) John and others, I have been looking for the point where the wrong path is instantiated. After analyses I ca

fixPath (was: committer wanted for review)

John and others, I have been looking for the point where the wrong path is instantiated. After analyses I came to the DownloadAnswer class which contains the original fixPath method that I c&p'ed to do my thing. I cannot support this with logging however. Where the DownloadAnswer is created eludes

Re: committer wanted for review

<<< text/html; charset=windows-1252: Unrecognized >>> <>

Re: committer wanted for review

On Jun 18, 2013, at 1:09 AM, Daan Hoogland wrote: > John, > > I like your ground principles, I will keep looking a bit for a better spot > to solve the problem. > > I am not sure your arguments about technical debt and user input validation > apply in the situation at hand. > > A user will pr

Re: committer wanted for review

John, I like your ground principles, I will keep looking a bit for a better spot to solve the problem. I am not sure your arguments about technical debt and user input validation apply in the situation at hand. A user will probably be just annoyed if we reject a valid posix path because it does

Re: committer wanted for review

Daan, Please see my comments in-line below. Thanks, -John On Jun 17, 2013, at 9:40 AM, Daan Hoogland wrote: > John, > > If I understand it correctly, you are stating that my take on the solution > is 'not done/not the way to go'? > > For the record the case I solved was an instance of A, bu

Re: committer wanted for review

John, If I understand it correctly, you are stating that my take on the solution is 'not done/not the way to go'? For the record the case I solved was an instance of A, but I would not call it adding technical debt. A arose from existing code in combination of a requirement to work with a non-pos

Re: committer wanted for review

All, Please see my comments in-line below. Thanks, -John On Jun 15, 2013, at 6:11 AM, Hiroaki KAWAI wrote: > Probably we've agreed on that double slash should not > generated by cloudstack. > > If something went wrong and double slash was passed to > Winfows based NFS, the reason may A) there

Re: committer wanted for review

Probably we've agreed on that double slash should not generated by cloudstack. If something went wrong and double slash was passed to Winfows based NFS, the reason may A) there was another code that generates double slash B) cloudstack configuration or something user input was bad C) some path co

Re: committer wanted for review

H John, Yes, actually I was going to make it info level but you swapped me of my feet with your remark. The point is that a mixed posix-paths/UNC system triggered this fix. A double slash has double meaning in such an environment. However the error, be it human or system generated, does not desta

Re: committer wanted for review

Daan, Since a WARN indicates a condition that could lead to system instability, many folks configure their log analysis to trigger notifications on WARN and INFO. Does escaping a character in a path warrant meet that criteria? Thanks, -John On Jun 14, 2013, at 11:52 AM, Daan Hoogland wrote:

Re: committer wanted for review

H John, I browsed through your comments and most I will apply. There is one where you contradict Hiroaki. This is about the logging level for reporting a changed path. I am going to follow my heart at this unless there is a project directive on it. regards, Daan On Fri, Jun 14, 2013 at 5:25 PM,

Re: committer wanted for review

Daan, I just looked through the review request, and published my comments. Thanks, -John On Jun 14, 2013, at 10:27 AM, Daan Hoogland wrote: > Hiroaki, > > - auto-fix may happen where it is really required >> > I do not have a clear view on this, so I took the approach of better safe > then s

Re: committer wanted for review

Hiroaki, - auto-fix may happen where it is really required > I do not have a clear view on this, so I took the approach of better safe then sorry. The submitted is what works. I don't see how the auto-fix should ever be needed if the source is fixed. Hope you can live with this. > - and if auto-f

Re: committer wanted for review

Thanks Hiroaki, On Fri, Jun 14, 2013 at 3:41 AM, Hiroaki KAWAI wrote: > I'd suggest: > - fix the generation of double slash itself > Is in the patch > - auto-fix may happen where it is really required > - and if auto-fix happens, it should log it with > WARN level. Good point, I will up the lev

Re: committer wanted for review

I'd suggest: - fix the generation of double slash itself - auto-fix may happen where it is really required - and if auto-fix happens, it should log it with WARN level. (2013/06/13 21:15), Daan Hoogland wrote: H, Can someone look at Review Request #11861 fo

RE: committer wanted for review

Ilya, Why do you ask? It only touches the database, not the nfs server itself! Regards, Daan Hoogland -Original Message- From: Daan Hoogland [mailto:dhoogl...@schubergphilis.com] Sent: donderdag 13 juni 2013 15:32 To: 'dev@cloudstack.apache.org' Subject: RE: committer wanted

RE: committer wanted for review

It has been tested on nexenta (sunos). I have no linux on my hands for this. -Original Message- From: Musayev, Ilya [mailto:imusa...@webmd.net] Sent: donderdag 13 juni 2013 15:27 To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org Subject: Re: committer wanted for review Daan, Has this been tested on linux

Re: committer wanted for review

Daan, Has this been tested on linux NFS? On 6/13/13 8:15 AM, "Daan Hoogland" wrote: >H, > >Can someone look at Review Request >#11861 for me please? > >Thanks, >Daan Hoogland

committer wanted for review

H, Can someone look at Review Request #11861 for me please? Thanks, Daan Hoogland